§Why CasetextPricing

Crawford v. PUD # 1 of Cowlitz County

RESPONSE

14 Cited authorities

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

    545 U.S. 546 (2005)   Cited 4,278 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

  2. Mine Workers v. Gibbs

    383 U.S. 715 (1966)   Cited 18,010 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that supplemental jurisdiction is a "doctrine of discretion"

  3. Acri v. Varian Associates, Inc.

    114 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 2,177 times
    Holding that a district court has discretion to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over nonfederal claims if it has dismissed all claims over which it had original jurisdiction

  4. 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"

  5. Bahrampour v. Lampert

    356 F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 368 times
    Holding prison officials may prohibit receipt of sexually explicit materials in light of concerns about preventing the sexual harassment of prison guards and other inmates

  6. Harrell v. 20th Century Ins. Co.

    934 F.2d 203 (9th Cir. 1991)   Cited 300 times
    Holding that because the underlying cause of action was barred by the applicable statute of limitations, "the civil conspiracy claim also must fail"

  7. Albingia Versicherungs A.G. v. Schenker Intl

    344 F.3d 931 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 176 times
    Holding that Section 1367(c) grants federal courts the discretion to dismiss state law claims when all federal claims have been dismissed

  8. CE Distribution, LLC v. New Sensor Corp.

    380 F.3d 1107 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 156 times
    Holding that it is “reasonable to infer” that the defendant knew its actions “would resonate in Arizona” because it knew that plaintiff was based in Arizona

  9. Fiore v. Walden

    688 F.3d 558 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 87 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court should draw only reasonable inferences from a plaintiff's pleadings in assessing personal jurisdiction

  10. Harris v. City of Seattle

    302 F. Supp. 2d 1200 (W.D. Wash. 2004)   Cited 6 times
    Applying RCW 4.24.510 immunity to the firm hired by the city of Seattle to conduct an independent investigation of a hostile workplace allegation

  11. 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"

  12. Rule 42 - Consolidation; Separate Trials

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 42   Cited 9,422 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Granting court's authority to consolidate related cases or "issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay."

  13. Rule 18 - Joinder of Claims

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 18   Cited 5,593 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a party may join multiple "claims" against a single defendant

  14. Rule 2 - One Form of Action

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 2   Cited 702 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing for "one form of action to be known as 'civil action,'" in lieu of discretely labeled actions at law and suits in equity