-
919 F.2d 1058·
5th Cir.·
1990-12-27
·cited 24×
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's removal provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1441(d), allows a foreign state third-party defendant to remove the entire action, not just its own claims, to federal court, provided minimal diversity exists. The court also affirmed dismissal on forum non co
-
699 F. Supp. 2d 1344·
S.D. Fla.·
2010-03-22
·cited 18×
The court held that federal statutory interpleader requirements were met, granting a preliminary injunction to restrain claimants and transferring the case to the Southern District of Texas.
-
239 F.2d 868·
5th Cir.·
1957-01-09
·cited 18×
The court held that minimal diversity among claimants is sufficient for federal jurisdiction under the Interpleader Act, and that the trial court properly granted summary judgment.
-
629 F.2d 397·
5th Cir.·
1980-10-27
·cited 10×
The court held that the citizenship of an interested stakeholder can be considered for establishing minimal diversity under the federal interpleader statute, and that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar this interpleader action seeking prospective relief.
-
715 F. Supp. 2d 1265·
S.D. Fla.·
2010-05-27
·cited 8×
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-06
·cited 7×
The court held that the case must be remanded to state court due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, specifically Article III standing and minimal diversity.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-13
·cited 4×
The Court held that a plaintiff in a statutory interpleader action must deposit the disputed funds or post a bond to establish subject matter jurisdiction.
-
586 F. Supp. 2d 1312·
M.D. Fla.·
2008-08-29
·cited 3×
The court held that removal of the case as a 'mass action' under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) was proper, and subsequent severance of claims does not divest the court of subject matter jurisdiction.
-
29 F.4th 1262·
11th Cir.·
2022-03-28
·cited 2×
The Eleventh Circuit held that it has appellate jurisdiction over the remand order and that the district court erred in applying CAFA's local controversy exception, reversing the remand.
-
926 F.2d 247·
3d Cir.·
1991-02-07
·cited 2×
Federal interpleader jurisdiction requires "adversity" between claimants, which is not present here due to policy set-offs that limit total recovery to the policy limit, even if set-offs are challenged.
-
2005 WL 2149281·
M.D. Fla.·
2020-06-10
·cited 1×
The court held that the plaintiff must deposit the interpleaded funds into the court registry to establish subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2026-02-06
Great West Casualty Company sought to deposit $2 million in policy limits into federal court through an interpleader action against competing claimants from a fatal car accident, invoking a recent Florida statute providing insurers a safe harbor from bad faith lawsuits if they fi
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-20
The court held that the plaintiff must provide further documentation to establish subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA and diversity jurisdiction, as the current allegations are insufficient.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-08-07
The court held that the case must be remanded to state court because the federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-12-11
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to properly allege citizenship for diversity jurisdiction under CAFA, and thus the complaint was dismissed without prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-10-24
The court held that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the petition to compel arbitration under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) by applying the 'look through' analysis to the underlying class action claims in arbitration.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-06-07
The court held that an amended class definition filed after removal may be considered when determining the applicability of CAFA's local controversy and discretionary exceptions, particularly when the amendment clarifies the original intent and does not seek to avoid federal juri
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-12-16
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $5 million threshold required by CAFA.
-
11th Cir.·
2021-03-12
Nursing home residents and their representatives sued a real estate brokerage firm and a facility operator in Florida state court alleging fraud in obtaining nursing facility licenses, but the defendants removed the case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act. The E
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-09-28
The court held that it has subject-matter jurisdiction under CAFA because the minimal diversity and amount-in-controversy requirements were met, and the exceptions to CAFA were not timely raised.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-12-30
The court granted Western Surety Company's motion for default judgment against Sunset Auto & Truck, LLC.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-10-23
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead federal subject matter jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) regarding both minimal diversity and the amount in controversy.
-
967 F. Supp. 2d 955·
S.D. Fla.·
1999-02-24
The court held that the plaintiffs met the requirements for class certification under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(2) for their challenge to the INS's district-wide practices regarding medical waivers for naturalization.