Federal Question Jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1331)

880 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 130 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• United States ex rel. Thomas G. Daniel v. Wilkins
  292 F.2d 348· 2d Cir.· 1961-07-03 ·cited 4×·via Federal Question
  The court held that the duration of detention and interrogation alone was insufficient to establish coercion as a matter of law, and thus the admissions were voluntary.
• Mary v. Beck
  293 F.2d 333· 6th Cir.· 1961-07-03 ·cited 4×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction because the plaintiff's complaint did not present a federal question requiring construction of federal law. The nature of the title and the deed's restrictive clause are matters of state law.
• Caryl Chessman v. Dickson
  275 F.2d 604· 9th Cir.· 1960-02-08 ·cited 4×·via Federal Question
  The court held that the petitioner had not presented substantial federal questions warranting a certificate of probable cause for appeal, and therefore denied the application for a stay of execution.
• Mestre v. City OF Atlanta
  255 F.2d 401· 5th Cir.· 1958-05-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the city's re-zoning ordinance was not arbitrary or unreasonable and therefore valid, denying the plaintiffs' prayer for an injunction.
• City of Memphis v. Ingram
  195 F.2d 338· 8th Cir.· 1952-04-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction, as the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction was sufficiently alleged and evidenced, and the suit was not an impermissible collateral attack on a state court order.
• Moore v. Cent. R. Co. of N.J.
  185 F.2d 369· 2d Cir.· 1950-11-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claim because the suit involved the enforcement and effect of a federal statute, even though the defendant was not the party who committed the alleged wrong under FELA.
• Walton v. City OF Atlanta
  181 F.2d 693· 5th Cir.· 1950-04-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that federal jurisdiction was properly predicated on 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3) and that the challenged city ordinances did not deprive taxi drivers of constitutional rights, thus denying injunctive relief.
• Diggs v. Pa. Pub. Util. Comm'n
  180 F.2d 623· 10th Cir.· 1950-03-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the lower court correctly dismissed the complaint because no substantial constitutional question was presented, and the plaintiffs failed to exhaust available state administrative and judicial remedies.
• Commack v. Bush
  175 F.2d 128· 6th Cir.· 1949-06-02 ·cited 4×·via Federal Question
  The court held that the appellant failed to exhaust state remedies and his petition for habeas corpus did not state a cause of action.
• Petersen v. Doctor
  2025 WL 96212· M.D. Fla.· 2025-01-22 ·cited 3×
  A federal court must remand an action if an amended complaint drops all federal claims, even if supplemental jurisdiction was initially proper.
• Ward v. Nierlich
  617 F. Supp. 2d 1226· S.D. Fla.· 2008-03-28 ·cited 3×
  The court held that Plaintiffs lacked standing to assert financial institution fraud as a predicate act for their RICO claims because it was not the proximate cause of their alleged injuries. However, the court found a genuine issue of material fact regarding mail and wire fraud
• MCI Telecomms. Corp. v. Credit Builders OF Am., Inc.
  980 F.2d 1021· 5th Cir.· 1993-01-12 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a suit to collect unpaid telecommunications charges under a tariff does not present a federal question, as it does not involve the validity, construction, or effect of federal law.
• Larrabee v. Derwinski
  968 F.2d 1497· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that 38 U.S.C. § 511, as amended by the VJRA, precludes district court jurisdiction over claims challenging the VA's provision of benefits, including due process claims, except for facial challenges to the statute itself.
• Kasib Tauheed Bilal v. Kaplan
  904 F.2d 14· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-10 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a private attorney's conduct in representing a client does not constitute state action for purposes of a § 1983 claim, and that federal question jurisdiction was not established.
• Catawba Indian Tribe OF South Carolina v. State OF S.C.
  865 F.2d 1444· 4th Cir.· 1989-01-23 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the presumption of possession is rebuttable and was rebutted by the Catawbas' judicial admission of being out of possession for 140 years.
• Showtime/The Movie Channel, Inc. v. Covered Bridge Condo. Ass'n
  693 F. Supp. 1080· S.D. Fla.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the condominium association's interception and distribution of satellite programming to its unit owners did not qualify for the 'private viewing' exception under the Federal Communications Act and constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition.
• Good Samaritan Med. Ctr. v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  776 F.2d 594· 6th Cir.· 1985-11-07 ·cited 3×
  The court held that federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 is precluded by 42 U.S.C. § 405(h) for claims arising under the Medicare Act, even if constitutional in nature, when an administrative review process is available.
• Montres Rolex, S.A. v. Snyder
  718 F.2d 524· 2d Cir.· 1983-09-14 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the definition of a 'counterfeit' trademark under 19 U.S.C. § 1526(e) should be applied from the standpoint of an average purchaser, and the comparison should be made with the mark on actual merchandise, not just the registration certificate.
• Rossi v. Best Resume Serv., Inc.
  497 F. Supp. 437· S.D. Fla.· 1980-09-11 ·cited 3×
  A petition for removal that fails to allege the principal place of business of a corporate party may be amended after the expiration of the thirty-day removal period if the omission is a technical defect, not a missing essential allegation.
• Gilliam v. State
  268 So. 2d 379· Fla.· 1972-10-13 ·cited 3×·via Federal Question
  Petitioners were held in contempt and jailed for refusing to answer questions at trial while claiming Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the contempt conviction on certiorari review, but stayed proceedings to allow petitioner
• Smith v. Wal-Mart Inc.
  917 F. Supp. 2d 1221· M.D. Fla.· 2021-03-01 ·cited 2×
  A civil action arising under state worker's compensation laws cannot be removed to federal court and must be remanded.
• Delta Health Grp., Inc. v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
  459 F. Supp. 2d 1207· N.D. Fla.· 2006-11-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the plaintiff's claims because they arose under the Medicare Act and were subject to the exclusive review provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 405(h), which requires administrative exhaustion.
• Gill v. Three Dimension Sys., Inc.
  87 F. Supp. 2d 1278· M.D. Fla.· 2000-02-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it had federal question jurisdiction and supplemental jurisdiction over state claims, but lacked personal jurisdiction over two defendants. The court denied dismissal for most claims but dismissed the mismanagement claim.
• Vill. OF ELK Grove Vill. v. Evans
  997 F.2d 328· 7th Cir.· 1993-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the case is now moot because the applicant withdrew its FCC permit application, rendering the dispute between the Village and the Corps of Engineers no longer a live controversy.
• Broughton Lumber Co. v. Columbia River Gorge Comm'n
  975 F.2d 616· 9th Cir.· 1992-09-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Eleventh Amendment barred the inverse condemnation action against the states, the federal courts lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the declaratory judgment action against the Commission, and the inverse condemnation action against the Commission was
• Schoolcraft v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  971 F.2d 81· 8th Cir.· 1992-07-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the class action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and that waiver of exhaustion was appropriate under the circumstances.
• Stevedoring Servs. OF Am., Inc. v. Eggert
  953 F.2d 552· 9th Cir.· 1992-01-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to entertain Stevedoring's claim for recoupment of alleged overcompensation under the LHWCA, as no federal cause of action for such recovery is implied or provided by the Act.
• Francis E. Heydt Co. v. United States
  948 F.2d 672· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by granting declaratory relief and awarding attorney fees under the EAJA because the equitable relief sought lacked significant prospective effect and the monetary claim belonged in the Claims Court.
• Broughton Lumber Co. v. Yeutter
  939 F.2d 1547· Fed. Cir.· 1991-07-12 ·cited 2×
  The Court of Appeals held that the district court correctly transferred Broughton's takings claim to the Claims Court, as neither the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act nor the Fifth Amendment provides jurisdiction in the district court for such claims exceeding $10,00
• Sibley v. Ball
  924 F.2d 25· 1st Cir.· 1991-01-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that because the plaintiff's suit sought back pay, it was cognizable under the Little Tucker Act, and therefore the appeal must be transferred to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has exclusive jurisdiction over such appeals.
• The City OF EL Paso v. The City OF Socorro
  917 F.2d 7· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court improperly applied Rule 11 standards by focusing on the correctness of the removal petition's legal basis rather than the reasonableness of the attorney's inquiry.
• Hardwick v. Cuomo
  891 F.2d 1097· 3d Cir.· 1989-12-19 ·cited 2×
  The Tax Injunction Act bars federal court jurisdiction over challenges to state taxes when a plain, speedy, and efficient remedy exists in state courts, and New York provides such a remedy for the challenged tax.
• Silvera v. The Mut. Life INS. Co. OF NEW York
  884 F.2d 423· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-29 ·cited 2×
  A municipal employer establishing or maintaining an employee welfare benefit plan by purchasing a group insurance policy for its employees qualifies as a 'governmental plan' exempt from ERISA coverage.
• Anderson v. Bowen
  881 F.2d 1· 2d Cir.· 1989-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction to review Medicare Part B benefit amount determinations, and that neither a substantial constitutional claim nor mandamus jurisdiction was established.
• Wardle v. Nw. Inv. Co.
  830 F.2d 118· 8th Cir.· 1987-09-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' action against the private defendants was barred by the statute of limitations under the Indian General Allotment Act and the Minnesota Marketable Title Act. The court also held that the United States had not waived sovereign immunity for the p
• Atl. City Mun. Utils. Auth. v. Reg'l Adm'r
  803 F.2d 96· 3d Cir.· 1986-10-14 ·cited 2×
  The majority held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over ACMUA's claim under the FWPCA citizen suit provision because the alleged duty to release funds was discretionary.
• Fate Terry v. Northrup Worldwide Aircraft Servs., Inc.
  786 F.2d 1558· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the conciliation agreement was not enforceable when the plaintiffs filed suit because it was stayed pending OFCCP review, thus their third-party beneficiary claim must be dismissed.
• Hollander v. Brezenoff
  787 F.2d 834· 2d Cir.· 1986-04-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that claims for Medicaid reimbursement are governed by New York's three-year statute of limitations for statutory claims, not the six-year contract limitations period, and that the claims were time-barred.
• Thomas v. Tenn. Valley Auth.
  769 F.2d 367· 6th Cir.· 1985-08-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that TVA, by inspecting and noting a safety violation, did not assume a duty to ensure its immediate correction, and thus could not be held liable for the contractor employee's death under the 'good Samaritan' doctrine or Kentucky law for its own negligence.
• Ammons v. Dade City
  594 F. Supp. 1274· M.D. Fla.· 1984-09-21 ·cited 2×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the City of Dade City engaged in unconstitutional racial discrimination by providing unequal municipal services, specifically street paving, to its black residents.
• The Genesee Brewing Co., Inc. v. Vill. OF Sodus Point
  733 F.2d 258· 2d Cir.· 1984-05-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the village was not required to refund payments made under a state law adopted pursuant to a repealed federal provision, as no federal right to such refunds was created.
• The Ecclesiastical Order OF THE ISM OF AM, Inc. v. Internal Revenue Serv.
  725 F.2d 398· 6th Cir.· 1984-01-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act and the Declaratory Judgment Act prohibit suits seeking to restrain the assessment or collection of federal taxes, or seeking declaratory relief in federal tax matters. The court affirmed the dismissal of claims based on these acts but
• NEW Jersey Speech-Language-Hearing Ass'n v. Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am.
  724 F.2d 383· 3d Cir.· 1983-12-29 ·cited 2×
  The Medicare Act's express grant of standing to providers evidences a congressional intent to preclude suppliers of services from seeking judicial review of reimbursement procedures or amounts.
• Wallace v. State OF Okla.
  721 F.2d 301· 10th Cir.· 1983-11-14 ·cited 2×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The Eleventh Amendment bars a suit against the State of Oklahoma for attorneys' fees incurred in a prior state court proceeding, as the state has not waived its immunity from suit in federal court.
• Cherry v. Steiner
  716 F.2d 687· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Arizona Groundwater Management Act of 1980 is constitutional and that the Supreme Court's summary dismissal in Chino Valley II is not binding on the specific constitutional claims raised here. The court also found the Act was not void for improper referenc
• Merrill Ditch-Liners, Inc. v. Nat Pablo
  670 F.2d 139· 9th Cir.· 1982-02-26 ·cited 2×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the Secretary's approval of a loan recipient's contract award, based on the agency's determination of repayment assurance, is an action committed to agency discretion and therefore not subject to judicial review.
• Jensen v. Mitschele Contracting Co.
  630 F.2d 209· 3d Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 2×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  A demand for access to corporate papers to prepare a federal estate tax return does not constitute a case arising under federal law sufficient to confer federal subject matter jurisdiction.
• Barlow v. Marion Cnty. Hosp. Dist.
  495 F. Supp. 682· M.D. Fla.· 1980-07-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while plaintiffs stated constitutional claims over which it had jurisdiction, they failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on the Hill-Burton Act because they did not allege exhaustion of administrative remedies as required by the statute.
• Gorman v. Army & AIR Force Exch. Serv.
  619 F.2d 1141· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-27 ·cited 2×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the district court possessed subject matter jurisdiction over a wrongful discharge claim against AAFES, even if not explicitly stated in the complaint.
• SEA Land Serv. Inc. v. Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto RICO Departmento de Instrucion Publica
  588 F.2d 312· 1st Cir.· 1978-12-08 ·cited 2×
  The Eleventh Amendment bars a federal court action for demurrage against the Department of Education of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, as the Commonwealth did not waive its sovereign immunity by purchasing goods shipped by a maritime carrier.