§Why CasetextPricing

In re Roundup Products Liability Litigation

OPPOSITION/RESPONSE

35 Cited authorities

  1. Lamie v. U.S. Trustee

    540 U.S. 526 (2004)   Cited 2,141 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts should not add an "absent word" to a statute

  2. Connecticut Nat. Bank v. Germain

    503 U.S. 249 (1992)   Cited 2,696 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 1292 applies also to bankruptcy jurisdiction and is not displaced by § 158(d)

  3. Forest Grove Sch. Dist. v. T.A.

    557 U.S. 230 (2009)   Cited 462 times
    Holding these provisions give courts "discretion to reduce the amount of a reimbursement award if the equities so warrant"

  4. Bedroc Ltd. v. United States

    541 U.S. 176 (2004)   Cited 509 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a court presumes that Congress says in the statute what it means

  5. National R. Passenger Corp. v. A. T. S. F. R. Co.

    470 U.S. 451 (1985)   Cited 339 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding that statute did not contain any language indicating intent to contract, and thus there was no contract

  6. Demarest v. Manspeaker

    498 U.S. 184 (1991)   Cited 226 times
    Holding that prisoners who testify in federal court are entitled to witness fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1821, even though “prisoners are technically ‘produced’ under a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, rather than summoned by a subpoena”

  7. Lively v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc.

    456 F.3d 933 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 403 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the forum-defendant rule is "nonjurisdictional"

  8. Encompass Ins. Co. v. Stone Mansion Rest. Inc.

    902 F.3d 147 (3d Cir. 2018)   Cited 217 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding removal by an in-state defendant is not precluded under Section 1441(b) where that defendant removes before it has been “properly joined and served.”

  9. Blackburn v. United Parcel Service

    179 F.3d 81 (3d Cir. 1999)   Cited 347 times
    Holding that employee's statement was not admissible under Rule 801(d)(D) in absence of evidence that employee was speaking for employer on matter within scope of agency or employment

  10. Murphy v. F.D.I.C

    208 F.3d 959 (11th Cir. 2000)   Cited 308 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "transferee court should apply its own interpretation of federal law"

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

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 111,248 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 1441 - Removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1441   Cited 49,986 times   149 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.”

  13. Section 1407 - Multidistrict litigation

    28 U.S.C. § 1407   Cited 7,053 times   105 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing consolidation of pretrial proceedings for related cases filed in multiple federal districts