475 U.S. 534 (1986) Cited 2,891 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a school board member sued in his official capacity was bound by the board’s litigation decisions and could not file his own notice of appeal
303 U.S. 283 (1938) Cited 6,045 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that when a complaint filed pleads more than the jurisdictional amount required for federal jurisdiction, "the sum claimed by the plaintiff controls if the claim is apparently made in good faith" and that "[i]t must appear to a legal certainty that the claim is really for less than the jurisdictional amount to justify dismissal"
Holding that respondents have "failed to demonstrate a live dispute involving the actual or threatened application of [state statute] to bar particular speech"
Holding that School Board violated Section 23:631 where it failed to pay amounts actually accrued and not lost by retired employees pursuant to School Board's "use it or lose it" accrued benefits policy
Holding that citizenship of defendant named in admiralty claim must be considered in determining diversity jurisdiction over law claims in which admiralty defendant was not named
Holding that plaintiff's negligence claim against an impleaded non-diverse third-party defendant required an independent basis for federal jurisdiction where the basis of jurisdiction in the original compliant was diversity
In Mason v. Norton, 360 So.2d 178, 180 (La. 1978), we stated that these statutes are designed to compel prompt payment ofwages upon an employee's discharge or resignation.
28 U.S.C. § 1331 Cited 97,317 times 134 Legal Analyses
Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."