§Why CasetextPricing

Notice

undefined

28 Cited authorities

  1. Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens

    574 U.S. 81 (2014)   Cited 4,656 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Holding removal notice need only contain short and plain statement of grounds for court's jurisdiction

  2. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc.

    545 U.S. 546 (2005)   Cited 4,276 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the supplemental jurisdiction statute permits the exercise of diversity jurisdiction over additional plaintiffs who fail to satisfy the minimum amount-in-controversy requirement, as long as the other elements of diversity jurisdiction are present and at least one named plaintiff does satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement

  3. Murphy Brothers, Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing

    526 U.S. 344 (1999)   Cited 2,725 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, where defendant was faxed a courtesy copy of a filed complaint, defendant's time to remove is not triggered "by mere receipt of the complaint unattended by any formal service"

  4. Tosco Corp. v. Communities for a Better Environment

    236 F.3d 495 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 686 times
    Holding the plaintiff has the burden of proving jurisdiction in order to survive a motion for lack of jurisdiction

  5. Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions Inc.

    40 Cal.4th 1094 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 520 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that California Labor Code claims have a three-year statute of limitations

  6. Lewis v. Verizon Communications

    627 F.3d 395 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 396 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party "need not concede liability" to remove a case to federal court under CAFA.

  7. Nishimoto v. Federman-Bachrach Associates

    903 F.2d 709 (9th Cir. 1990)   Cited 746 times
    Holding that an objection to removal "is not preserved unless an interlocutory appeal is filed challenging the district court's order denying remand"

  8. Executive Software v. U.S. Dist. Court

    24 F.3d 1545 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 519 times
    Holding that supplemental jurisdiction must be asserted if permitted by 28 U.S.C. § 1367 unless an exception in § 1367(c) applies

  9. Industrial Tectonics, Inc. v. Aero Alloy

    912 F.2d 1090 (9th Cir. 1990)   Cited 545 times
    Holding that a corporation is a citizen of the state in which it is incorporated and of the state in which it has its principal place of business

  10. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Dyer

    19 F.3d 514 (10th Cir. 1994)   Cited 252 times
    Holding that once averment of diversity is challenged, burden is on party invoking jurisdiction to show that it exists

  11. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 113,606 times   572 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"

  12. Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 63,426 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

  13. Section 1441 - Removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1441   Cited 50,910 times   151 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[a]ny civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the ... laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties.”

  14. Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 6   Cited 50,129 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

  15. Section 1391 - Venue generally

    28 U.S.C. § 1391   Cited 28,500 times   199 Legal Analyses
    Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

  16. Section 1446 - Procedure for removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1446   Cited 22,265 times   141 Legal Analyses
    Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim

  17. Section 84 - California

    28 U.S.C. § 84   Cited 1,458 times
    Stating Amador County is part of Eastern District of California

  18. Section 17208 - Statute of limitations

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17208   Cited 638 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Governing UCL claims

  19. Section 415.30 - Mail service

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 415.30   Cited 385 times
    Providing that service of a summons pursuant to that section is complete on the date a written acknowledgment of receipt of summons is executed