Diversity Jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1332)

661 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 931 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Harold C. Ackert for the benefit of Laura B. Smith v. Honorable Frederick van Pelt Bryan
  299 F.2d 65· 2d Cir.· 1962-01-03 ·cited 14×
  The court denied a petition for mandamus seeking to stay a transfer of venue, finding that the transferee court must assume jurisdiction to consider the substantial question of Investment Company Act applicability, despite doubts.
• Burkhardt v. Bates
  296 F.2d 315· 8th Cir.· 1961-11-30 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court affirmed the dismissal, agreeing with the lower court's determination that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations after the jurisdictional defect was cured.
• Blanche Sykes v. United States
  290 F.2d 555· 9th Cir.· 1961-04-03 ·cited 14×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing the case for lack of prosecution, as the delay was only slightly over six months and there was no intent to abandon the case.
• Randolph v. Emp'rs Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. OF Wis. Garnishee
  260 F.2d 461· 8th Cir.· 1958-11-03 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that a post-judgment garnishment proceeding is a civil action removable to federal court under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1441(a) if diversity of citizenship and jurisdictional amount are met, and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or overruling the motion f
• Mantin v. Broad. Music, Inc.
  248 F.2d 530· 9th Cir.· 1957-10-22 ·cited 14×
  A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, when accompanied by matters outside the pleadings, must be treated as a motion for summary judgment under Rule 12(b).
• Kaufman v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
  245 F.2d 918· 3d Cir.· 1957-07-03 ·cited 14×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  A stipulation by parties to establish federal jurisdiction based on the amount in controversy is insufficient if the jurisdictional prerequisite is denied and not otherwise proven.
• Fitzgerald v. Haynes
  241 F.2d 417· 3d Cir.· 1957-02-15 ·cited 14×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the absent local unions were indispensable parties, and thus the district court did not err in dismissing the complaint.
• Walker v. Felmont OIL Corp.
  240 F.2d 912· 6th Cir.· 1957-02-12 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the case should be remanded to the District Court to address jurisdictional issues, including Eleventh Amendment immunity and diversity of citizenship, before considering the merits of the state law questions.
• Shall v. Henry
  211 F.2d 226· 7th Cir.· 1954-03-05 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the suit because it lacked jurisdiction due to improper venue and because the antitrust claims were not applicable to professional boxing.
• Chicago Great W. Ry. Co. v. Chicago
  193 F.2d 975· 8th Cir.· 1952-02-05 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the District Court had jurisdiction to issue a preliminary injunction requiring a railroad to provide switching service, even on intrastate traffic, when a substantial federal question was presented.
• Taylor v. Hubbell
  188 F.2d 106· 9th Cir.· 1951-03-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the issues of whether the plaintiff and the defendant were in the same employ and whether the plaintiff had made an irrevocable election of remedy were jurisdictional and thus properly decided by the court, not the jury.
• Paudler v. Paudler
  185 F.2d 901· 5th Cir.· 1950-12-21 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the plaintiff had established citizenship in Arkansas, conferring diversity jurisdiction.
• Peters v. Standard Oil Co. of Tex.
  174 F.2d 162· 5th Cir.· 1949-05-04 ·cited 14×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the federal district court had jurisdiction to remove the case from state court and did not err in granting a preliminary injunction to protect that jurisdiction.
• Hann v. City OF Clinton
  131 F.2d 978· 10th Cir.· 1942-11-17 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that diversity of citizenship existed and the amount in controversy was sufficient for federal jurisdiction, and that the actions were not barred by limitations or res judicata.
• Douglas v. City OF Jeannette
  130 F.2d 652· 3d Cir.· 1942-08-31 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The dissenting judge would reverse the lower court's decree and remand with directions to dismiss the complaint for want of jurisdiction.
• Md. Cas. Co. v. Faulkner
  126 F.2d 175· 6th Cir.· 1942-03-02 ·cited 14×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the insurer's petition for declaratory relief, as the insurer had a right to seek such relief to determine its policy obligations.
• ECB USA, Inc. v. Chubb Ins. Co. of N.J.
  113 F.4th 1312· 11th Cir.· 2024-08-29 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the phrase 'for financial institutions' modifies all services listed in the insurance policy's definition of 'management consulting services,' including accounting.
• Shell Oil Co. v. Altina Assocs., Inc.
  866 F. Supp. 536· M.D. Fla.· 1994-07-19 ·cited 13×
  The court held that federal courts have jurisdiction over franchisor actions under the PMPA, and granted a preliminary injunction because the franchisor demonstrated likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
• Manfred Demenus and Theodore Van Arthos v. Tinton 35 Inc.
  873 F.2d 50· 3d Cir.· 1989-04-25 ·cited 13×
  The court held that it lacks appellate jurisdiction over an interlocutory order discharging a notice of lis pendens because the order is not effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment and is not separate from the merits of the underlying action.
• Kirby v. Mellenger
  830 F.2d 176· 11th Cir.· 1987-10-20 ·cited 13×·via Domestic Relations Exception To Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the case based on the domestic relations exception to diversity jurisdiction.
• Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc'y OF NEW York, Inc.
  819 F.2d 875· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-10 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the Jehovah's Witnesses' practice of shunning is a constitutionally protected religious practice under the Free Exercise Clause, and imposing tort liability for this practice would unconstitutionally burden their religious freedom.
• N. Am. Watch Corp. v. Princess Ermine Jewels
  786 F.2d 1447· 9th Cir.· 1986-04-15 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court properly exercised diversity jurisdiction and did not abuse its discretion in dismissing counterclaims as a sanction for willful discovery violations.
• Abels v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
  770 F.2d 26· 3d Cir.· 1985-08-08 ·cited 13×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that federal subject matter jurisdiction was lacking at the time of removal due to the joinder of Doe defendants, requiring vacation of the judgment and remand to state court.
• Adden v. Middlebrooks
  688 F.2d 1147· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-15 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the plaintiff's suit against the Louisiana Department of Corrections is barred by the Eleventh Amendment, but the plaintiff may proceed against Middlebrooks and Phelps in their individual capacities.
• Wilsey Poirrier v. Nicklos Drilling Co.
  648 F.2d 1063· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-26 ·cited 13×
  An order denying remand of a case removed to federal court is not immediately appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and mandamus is not appropriate absent exceptional circumstances.
• Adams v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.
  597 F.2d 570· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-22 ·cited 13×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that Florida law does not permit an attorney to retain funds from a client in excess of the attorney's claimed amount.
• Clark v. Gulf OIL Corp. & Tex. E. Transmission Corp. Theodore Q. Thompson & Jamestown Vill. Apts., Ltd.
  570 F.2d 1138· 3d Cir.· 1977-12-30 ·cited 13×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court had federal subject matter jurisdiction, but that no private cause of action for damages is implied under the Natural Gas Act for a producer's failure to comply with a certificate of public convenience and necessity.
• Grimes v. Chrysler Motors Corp. & Nordic Int'l Co.
  565 F.2d 841· 2d Cir.· 1977-11-17 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court had ancillary jurisdiction to supervise the distribution of settlement funds and that its factual findings regarding disbursements were not clearly erroneous.
• Ned G. Saalfrank v. Melva M. O'Daniel
  533 F.2d 325· 6th Cir.· 1976-04-14 ·cited 13×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that a federal court lacks ancillary jurisdiction to hear a direct claim by a plaintiff against a non-diverse third-party defendant when the sole basis for federal jurisdiction is diversity of citizenship.
• Hanraty v. Ostertag
  470 F.2d 1096· 10th Cir.· 1972-12-26 ·cited 13×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the complaint stated a claim under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, and that the federal court had pendent jurisdiction over the state law claims.
• Price v. Greenway
  167 F.2d 196· 3d Cir.· 1948-03-26 ·cited 13×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that a prior judge's ruling on diversity jurisdiction, made after hearing evidence, should be respected by a subsequent judge in the same case, even after a mistrial. The court also affirmed the jury's verdict and denied a motion for a new trial based on newly disc
• Grand Rapids Furniture Co. v. Grand Rapids Furniture Co.
  127 F.2d 245· 7th Cir.· 1942-04-10 ·cited 13×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims could be aggregated to meet the jurisdictional amount requirement because they shared a common cause of action and an undivided interest, analogous to a class action.
• Qantum Commc'ns Corp. v. Star Broad., Inc.
  473 F. Supp. 2d 1249· S.D. Fla.· 2007-02-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendants materially breached the agreement by negotiating with a competitor, rendering their termination invalid and entitling the plaintiff to specific performance, injunctive relief, and declaratory judgment.
• Am. Aircraft Sales Int'l, Inc. v. Airwarsaw, Inc.
  55 F. Supp. 2d 1347· M.D. Fla.· 1999-07-02 ·cited 12×
  The court granted the motion to transfer venue, finding that the convenience of the parties and witnesses, the location of evidence, and the interest of justice weighed strongly in favor of transferring the case to the Northern District of Indiana.
• Las Vistas Villas, S.A. v. Petersen
  778 F. Supp. 1202· M.D. Fla.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that diversity jurisdiction did not exist because the defendant, a dual citizen, was domiciled in Costa Rica, not a U.S. state, and the plaintiff corporation was a U.S. citizen.
• H.B. Fuller Co. v. Kinetic Sys., Inc.
  932 F.2d 681· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-17 ·cited 12×
  A limited warranty's failure of essential purpose requires a breach of contract, and a buyer cannot claim breach of implied warranty of fitness if the seller lacked superior knowledge or the disclaimer was conspicuous.
• Emp'rs Ins. OF Wausau v. Crown Cork & Seal Co., Inc.
  905 F.2d 42· 3d Cir.· 1990-06-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court must first determine subject matter jurisdiction, including the propriety of party alignment, before considering whether to stay the action.
• Minker v. Baltimore Annual Conf. OF United Methodist Church & Bishop Joseph A. Yeakel
  894 F.2d 1354· D.C. Cir.· 1990-01-19 ·cited 12×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause prohibits courts from adjudicating age discrimination claims against a church regarding ministerial appointments, but does not bar claims for breach of an oral employment contract, provided the claim can be proven without excessive entan
• Ramirez v. Inter-Continental Hotels
  890 F.2d 760· 5th Cir.· 1989-12-18 ·cited 12×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  State law claims seeking benefits from an ERISA plan are preempted by ERISA, and a state statute allowing a private right of action for improper insurance claims handling is not saved from preemption.
• Richards v. Attorneys' Title Guar. Fund, Inc.
  866 F.2d 1570· 10th Cir.· 1989-02-14 ·cited 12×
  A principal is liable under Restatement (Second) of Agency § 261 for an agent's theft if the principal placed the agent in a position to commit the act, even if the act was theft rather than fraud, and the agent was acting within apparent authority.
• Ne. Fed. Credit Union v. Neves
  837 F.2d 531· 1st Cir.· 1988-01-25 ·cited 12×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the state was the real party in interest, precluding diversity, and the proposed amendment to assert federal question jurisdiction was merely a defensive maneuver against a state law action.
• Meyer v. Dans un Jardin
  816 F.2d 533· 10th Cir.· 1987-04-17 ·cited 12×
  A franchise agreement is not a security under federal law when the franchisee's profits depend significantly on their own managerial efforts, and arbitration clauses for state law claims are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act, preempting conflicting state law.
• Congoleum Corp. v. DLW Aktiengesellschaft
  729 F.2d 1240· 9th Cir.· 1984-04-06 ·cited 12×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that a defendant's limited sales and marketing activities in a forum, conducted through independent representatives and unrelated to the cause of action, are insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction.
• Polyplastics, Inc. v. Transconex, Inc.
  713 F.2d 875· 1st Cir.· 1983-08-03 ·cited 12×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  An order staying state court proceedings after removal is not an appealable interlocutory injunction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) because removal automatically effects a stay and the order is merely declaratory of existing law.
• Aleksander Kantor v. Wellesley Galleries, Ltd.
  704 F.2d 1088· 9th Cir.· 1983-04-26 ·cited 12×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  A stateless alien domiciled in a state cannot sue in federal court under diversity of citizenship jurisdiction because United States citizenship is a prerequisite to being a citizen of a state for diversity purposes.
• Rosquist v. The SOO Line R.R.
  692 F.2d 1107· 7th Cir.· 1982-11-10 ·cited 12×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in reducing the attorneys' fees awarded, as it had the jurisdiction and justification to review the fee agreement, especially given the vulnerable parties involved.
• Baldwin v. Sears
  667 F.2d 458· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) does not expressly prohibit removal of cases to federal court, and that summary judgment was appropriate as no genuine issues of material fact existed.
• Firestone v. The Cleveland Tr. Co. & Russell A. Firestone, Jr.
  654 F.2d 1212· 6th Cir.· 1981-07-30 ·cited 12×·via Domestic Relations Exception To Diversity Jurisdiction
  Federal courts will generally abstain from exercising jurisdiction over domestic relations matters, even when diversity jurisdiction exists, especially when the core issues involve ongoing state court litigation concerning divorce decrees and support obligations.
• LEE v. Navarro Sav. Ass'n
  597 F.2d 421· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-18 ·cited 12×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that for diversity jurisdiction purposes, the citizenship of a business trust is determined by the citizenship of its trustees, not its beneficiary shareholders, when the trustees have exclusive control and the right to sue.
• Housand v. Maxwell Heiman
  594 F.2d 923· 2d Cir.· 1979-03-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the plaintiff's constitutional claims were properly dismissed for lack of state action or bias, the case should be remanded to allow the plaintiff to amend his complaint to assert diversity jurisdiction.