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

• Teague v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen
  127 F.2d 53· 6th Cir.· 1942-04-09 ·cited 10×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint did not state a cause of action arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States, and thus federal jurisdiction was lacking.
• Benitez v. Bank of Nova Scotia
  125 F.2d 519· 1st Cir.· 1942-01-30 ·cited 10×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court vacated the deficiency judgment against the appellant, pending a determination of her status as a farmer-debtor under the Bankruptcy Act.
• J.C. Penney Corp., Inc. v. Oxford Mall, LLC
  100 F.4th 1340· 11th Cir.· 2024-05-01 ·cited 9×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's sanctions award and decision to strike Oxford Mall's affidavit, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Kontoulas v. A.H. Robins Co., Inc.
  745 F.2d 312· 4th Cir.· 1984-10-03 ·cited 9×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1332(A)
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of motions to dismiss for improper venue and forum non conveniens, finding that the defendants failed to meet their burden of showing an adequate alternative forum.
• Kahal v. J. W. Wilson & Assocs., Inc.
  673 F.2d 547· D.C. Cir.· 1982-03-23 ·cited 9×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  A claim for punitive damages must have a colorable basis in law and fact to satisfy the federal jurisdictional amount requirement when it is the sole basis for jurisdiction.
• Asea, Inc. v. S. Pac. Transp. Co.
  669 F.2d 1242· 9th Cir.· 1981-12-28 ·cited 9×
  A district court may, in its discretion, order matters admitted if a party fails to comply with Rule 36(a) by not making reasonable inquiry or if readily obtainable information is sufficient to admit or deny, especially in cases of discovery abuse.
• Franklin Supply Co. v. Tolman
  454 F.2d 1059· 9th Cir.· 1971-12-16 ·cited 9×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the accounting firm's failure to formally disclose an employee's dual relationships and its interpretation of inventory valuation terms did not constitute legal fraud, but could constitute constructive fraud or negligence.
• Joseph Muller Corp. Zurich v. Societe Anonyme de Gerance et D'Armement
  451 F.2d 727· 2d Cir.· 1971-11-11 ·cited 9×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that while a Franco-Swiss treaty does not bar suits between nationals of those countries in U.S. courts under Rule 17(b), comity requires dismissal of a contract claim lacking federal jurisdiction, but not an antitrust claim due to overriding U.S. public policy.
• Cent. OF Ga. Ry. Co. v. Riegel Textile Corp.
  426 F.2d 935· 5th Cir.· 1970-05-13 ·cited 9×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  A third-party defendant can remove a severed claim to federal court if diversity jurisdiction exists, as they are considered a 'defendant' under the removal statute after severance.
• Hardy Lee Jamison, Jr. v. Memphis Transit Mgmt. Co.
  381 F.2d 670· 6th Cir.· 1967-08-02 ·cited 9×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The mother of a deceased child is an indispensable party to a wrongful death action under Tennessee law, and her citizenship must be considered for diversity jurisdiction.
• Kirby Lumber Corp. v. State OF La.
  293 F.2d 82· 5th Cir.· 1961-07-13 ·cited 9×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The Fifth Circuit held that the Anacoco-Prairie State Game and Fish Commission, having the power to sue and be sued under state law, is a distinct entity subject to federal diversity jurisdiction, and thus the district court correctly denied the motion to remand.
• Ellis v. Se. Constr. Co., Inc.
  260 F.2d 280· 8th Cir.· 1958-10-21 ·cited 9×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  A member of the armed forces can acquire a new domicile of choice if physical presence and intent to make a place their home concur, even if stationed there due to military orders.
• Smith v. Sperling
  237 F.2d 317· 9th Cir.· 1956-05-21 ·cited 9×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the trial court properly realigned the corporation as a plaintiff, thus destroying diversity jurisdiction for the first cause of action. However, the court reversed the dismissal of the second cause of action, finding the trial court should have first assessed
• Birmingham Post Co. v. Brown
  217 F.2d 127· 5th Cir.· 1954-11-24 ·cited 9×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that the defendant bore the burden of proving the plaintiff was not a citizen of Texas, as the plaintiff always bears the burden of proving jurisdiction.
• Whelan v. Placid OIL Co.
  198 F.2d 39· 5th Cir.· 1952-07-24 ·cited 9×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that parties with interests in a unitized oil and gas lease are indispensable parties to a suit concerning title to that leasehold estate.
• Ridder Bros., Inc. v. Blethen
  142 F.2d 395· 9th Cir.· 1944-04-29 ·cited 9×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the value of the matter in controversy for federal jurisdiction is measured from the plaintiff's viewpoint, not the defendant's potential loss.
• Wilson v. Hearos, LLC
  128 F.4th 1254· 11th Cir.· 2025-02-18 ·cited 8×
  Removal by a non-party is a waivable procedural defect, not a jurisdictional one, and the court must apply state law regarding statutes of limitations and service of process after removal in a diversity case.
• Fusco v. Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC
  806 F. Supp. 2d 1240· M.D. Fla.· 2011-08-19 ·cited 8×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1332(A)
  The court held that the defendant failed to meet its burden of proving the amount in controversy exceeded the jurisdictional threshold, and therefore, the case should be remanded.
• In re Motions to Certify Classes
  715 F. Supp. 2d 1265· S.D. Fla.· 2010-05-27 ·cited 8×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1332(A)
  The court held that class certification was inappropriate due to significant manageability concerns and individualized factual issues, leading to dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
• Martin v. Mentor Corp.
  142 F. Supp. 2d 1346· M.D. Fla.· 2001-05-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that receipt of a settlement proposal via facsimile constituted legally sufficient notice to commence the thirty-day removal period, and the defendant's failure to remove within that period waived the right to removal.
• Ting-Hwa Shao v. Link Cargo (Taiwan) Ltd.
  986 F.2d 700· 4th Cir.· 1993-02-22 ·cited 8×
  The Carmack Amendment preempts state common law claims for lost or damaged goods if the shipment is subject to ICC jurisdiction, but the statute of limitations in § 11706 does not apply to such claims. The court also affirmed the dismissal of defendants for failure to serve.
• Putnam Resources v. Pateman
  958 F.2d 448· 1st Cir.· 1992-02-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a jury verdict, when construed in light of the court's instructions and the parties' acquiescence, can support a judgment even if the verdict form is not perfectly explicit regarding every claim. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the jury's f
• Lewis v. Windsor Door Co.
  926 F.2d 729· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-22 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that a third-party action against the federal government under the FTCA cannot provide federal subject-matter jurisdiction for the main claim when no independent jurisdiction exists, and that the United States lacked authority to remove the case.
• Carlton v. Worcester Ins. Co.
  923 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1991-01-08 ·cited 8×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1332(A)
  The court held that the insurance policy's exclusion for vehicles owned by a family member but not insured under the policy was clear, unambiguous, and valid under Rhode Island law, barring coverage for the insured's son's death.
• Dunham v. Frank's Nursery & Crafts, Inc.
  919 F.2d 1281· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-12 ·cited 8×
  The Supreme Court's decision in Batson v. Kentucky, which prohibits racial discrimination in peremptory challenges during criminal trials, applies to private litigants in civil cases because the trial court's involvement in excusing jurors constitutes state action.
• Fin. Timing Publ'ns, Inc. v. Compugraphic Corp.
  893 F.2d 936· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that procedural removal requirements are waivable, and the plaintiff waived objections to the timeliness of the removal petition. The court also held that a contractual limitations period does not bar a fraud in the inducement claim if the contract language does no
• Cipollone v. Liggett Grp., Inc.
  893 F.2d 541· 3d Cir.· 1990-01-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in allowing the jury to consider post-1965 conduct for comparative fault on the failure to warn claim and in its jury instructions on the express warranty claim. A new trial is ordered for the failure to warn claim.
• Weltman v. Ozzie Silna
  879 F.2d 425· 8th Cir.· 1989-07-19 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the amended Delaware partnership law retroactively to determine the validity of the partnership amendment. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
• Bettis v. Oscar Mayer Foods Corp. & Gen. Foods Corp.
  878 F.2d 192· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-19 ·cited 8×
  A state-law claim for retaliatory discharge for exercising workers' compensation rights is not preempted by Section 301 of the LMRA if it can be resolved without interpreting the collective bargaining agreement.
• Jablonski v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc.
  863 F.2d 289· 3d Cir.· 1988-12-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that claims for personal injury damages, even if pleaded as breach of contract, are subject to Pennsylvania's two-year statute of limitations for tort actions, and that denying leave to amend a complaint to add such a claim was not an abuse of discretion if the cla
• Wilfredo Rodriguez-Diaz v. Marcelo Sierra-Martinez
  853 F.2d 1027· 1st Cir.· 1988-08-10 ·cited 8×
  The majority's decision to apply New York law to determine the plaintiff's domicile, despite his minority status under Puerto Rican law, is criticized.
• Morongo Band OF Mission Indians v. Cal. State Bd. OF Equalization
  858 F.2d 1376· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-14 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The district court improperly exercised subject matter jurisdiction over the Indian tribe's interpleader action because the claims did not arise under federal law.
• The Boatmen's Nat'l Bank OF ST. Louis v. Smith
  835 F.2d 1200· 7th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the loan agreement unambiguously restricted the use of funds for the debtor's tax liabilities, and the bank effectively restricted the funds, thus they were not available to satisfy a judgment creditor.
• Jones v. Cont'l Ins.
  670 F. Supp. 937· S.D. Fla.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Florida Statutes Section 624.155(1)(b)(1) applies to first-party actions and is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, and that the plaintiff stated a claim under it. The court also dismissed claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and tort
• The Toro Co. v. Krouse
  827 F.2d 155· 7th Cir.· 1987-08-19 ·cited 8×
  Under Indiana law, an accounting firm is not liable to a third-party creditor for negligence in preparing financial reports unless there is privity or conduct demonstrating the accountant's knowledge of and link to the third party's reliance.
• Jaser v. NEW York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Ass'n & Adriano Fernandes
  815 F.2d 240· 2d Cir.· 1987-03-31 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that the district court erred in denying leave to amend the complaint to drop nondiverse parties, as those parties were not indispensable. However, the dismissal for lack of diversity was proper.
• Richendollar v. Diamond M Drilling Co., Inc.
  784 F.2d 580· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove a cause of action under § 905(b) against the employer for negligence, as the negligence was that of a fellow employee and not imputable to the vessel owner as a separate entity.
• George v. United Ky. Bank, Inc.
  753 F.2d 50· 6th Cir.· 1985-01-22 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that a state court's judgment, which found no fraud by the bank, collaterally estopped the plaintiffs from pursuing a RICO claim based on fraud in the inducement, as the state court refused to allow amendment for that specific claim. The court also affirmed the dis
• Bettin v. Nelson
  744 F.2d 53· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the parents' financial stake in burial expenses and their parental relationship made their appointment as administrators non-collusive for diversity jurisdiction purposes. It also held that mere ownership of defective farm equipment, without control or benefit
• Mo. Terrazzo Co. v. Iowa Nat'l Mut. Ins. Co.
  740 F.2d 647· 8th Cir.· 1984-08-08 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority mischaracterized the basis of liability and reached the wrong result regarding insurance coverage.
• Dennis v. Joubert
  736 F.2d 191· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-12 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Suit
  The court held that the trial court was justified in finding the plaintiff responsible for the fires based on circumstantial evidence of financial motive and that the plaintiff's arguments regarding evidentiary rulings were without merit.
• Loyd v. Loyd
  731 F.2d 393· 7th Cir.· 1984-03-26 ·cited 8×·via Probate Exception To Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court held that the district court properly granted summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as the administrator's actions did not constitute state action, and due process claims were satisfied by proper notice and opportunity to
• Netherlands Shipmortgage Corp., Ltd. v. Madias
  717 F.2d 731· 2d Cir.· 1983-09-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Ship Mortgage Act does not grant admiralty jurisdiction over guarantors, but reversed the dismissal because the finding that the plaintiff was 'doing business' in New York under BCL § 1312 was clearly erroneous.
• Crowley v. Glaze
  710 F.2d 676· 10th Cir.· 1983-06-20 ·cited 8×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1332(A)
  The court held that the plaintiff had established a change of domicile to Minnesota, thus conferring diversity jurisdiction on the district court.
• Rosenfeld v. S.F.C. Corp.
  702 F.2d 282· 1st Cir.· 1983-03-21 ·cited 8×·via Federal Diversity Jurisdiction
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal, holding that venue was improper in Massachusetts.
• Voktas, Inc. v. Cent. Soya Co., Inc.
  689 F.2d 103· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the federal magistrate did not abuse his discretion in denying a motion to stay federal proceedings pending the outcome of a parallel state court action, as the federal court has a strong obligation to exercise its jurisdiction.
• Verone Marin Fehlhaber v. Fehlhaber
  669 F.2d 990· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while support and attorney fees judgments are enforceable, the property division judgment is not because the California court exceeded its jurisdiction by improperly offsetting community property assets in a non-statutory equitable action.
• Klaus-Dieter Rohde v. Se. Drilling Co., Inc.
  667 F.2d 1215· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an injury sustained on a fixed platform on the high seas is not within federal admiralty jurisdiction, and the plaintiff's claims are barred by Louisiana's one-year statute of limitations.
• Bank OF Montreal v. Thorhallur G. Olafsson
  648 F.2d 1078· 6th Cir.· 1981-05-12 ·cited 8×·via Diversity Of Citizenship
  The court held that a district court has discretion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) to set aside a default judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, even after a year, when considering the equities.
• Coastland Corp. v. Third Nat'l Mortg. Co.
  611 F.2d 969· 4th Cir.· 1979-12-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding a binding oral commitment for construction financing, but erred in awarding lost profits for a new venture.