101 Cited authorities

  1. Martin v. Franklin Capital

    546 U.S. 132 (2005)   Cited 3,633 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding “absent unusual circumstances, attorney's fees should not be awarded when the removing party has an objectively reasonable basis for removal”
  2. Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.

    501 U.S. 32 (1991)   Cited 7,009 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the federal sanctions provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1927, "and the various sanctioning provisions in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure" do not "reflect a legislative intent to displace the inherent power" (footnote omitted)
  3. Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis

    519 U.S. 61 (1996)   Cited 2,141 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "diversity became complete" when a nondiverse party settled and was dismissed from the case and that therefore "[t]he jurisdictional defect was cured"
  4. Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co.

    517 U.S. 706 (1996)   Cited 2,139 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an abstention-based remand is not a remand for “lack of subject matter jurisdiction” for purposes of §§ 1447(c) and (d)
  5. Business Guides v. Chromatic Comm. Enterprises

    498 U.S. 533 (1991)   Cited 739 times
    Holding that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 was not a fee-shifting provision because Rule 11 sanctions were not “tied to the outcome of litigation,” instead turning on whether a “specific filing” was well founded, and shifted the costs of a “discrete” portion of the litigation rather than the litigation as a whole
  6. Whitaker v. American Telecasting, Inc.

    261 F.3d 196 (2d Cir. 2001)   Cited 695 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that pleading which provided incomplete address information did not allow the defendant to "intelligently ascertain" removability; the defendant was not required to research the missing address of another named defendant to discover removability
  7. Eastway Const. Corp. v. City of New York

    762 F.2d 243 (2d Cir. 1985)   Cited 1,161 times
    Holding Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 requires sanctions against "an attorney and/or his client when it appears that a pleading has been interposed for any improper purpose, or where, after reasonable inquiry, a competent attorney could not form a reasonable belief that the pleading is well grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law."
  8. Ritchey v. Upjohn Drug Co.

    139 F.3d 1313 (9th Cir. 1998)   Cited 602 times
    Holding that only cases that become removable "sometime after the initial commencement of the action" are "barred by the one-year exception"
  9. Baffa v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Secs. Corp.

    222 F.3d 52 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 545 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a parent lacked standing to bring suit based on a New York UGMA account once the child turned eighteen
  10. Brierly v. Alusuisse Flexible Packaging Inc.

    184 F.3d 527 (6th Cir. 1999)   Cited 409 times
    Holding that the one-year rule only applies to cases that were not removable based on the initial pleading
  11. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 86,509 times   522 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 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 79,593 times   96 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."
  13. Section 1441 - Removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1441   Cited 38,911 times   108 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a civil action brought in state court can be removed to federal court if the district court would have had original jurisdiction over the action
  14. Section 1334 - Bankruptcy cases and proceedings

    28 U.S.C. § 1334   Cited 33,134 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Granting "exclusive jurisdiction" to a federal court handling a bankruptcy case "of all the property, wherever located, of the debtor as of the commencement of such case, and of property of the estate"
  15. Section 1447 - Procedure after removal generally

    28 U.S.C. § 1447   Cited 26,321 times   74 Legal Analyses
    Holding that with exceptions not relevant here, "[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise"
  16. Section 1446 - Procedure for removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1446   Cited 15,442 times   123 Legal Analyses
    Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim
  17. Section 1442 - Federal officers or agencies sued or prosecuted

    28 U.S.C. § 1442   Cited 3,743 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Granting removal power to "[a]ny officer of the United States . . . or person acting under him"
  18. Rule 408 - Compromise Offers and Negotiations

    Fed. R. Evid. 408   Cited 3,162 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that premature deliberations constituted an internal jury influence subject to the post-verdict restrictions of Rule 606(b)
  19. Section 1452 - Removal of claims related to bankruptcy cases

    28 U.S.C. § 1452   Cited 2,171 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Granting removal power to any “party” in a bankruptcy case
  20. Section 3017 - Demand for relief

    N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 3017   Cited 510 times

    (a) Generally. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (c) of this section, every complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, interpleader complaint, and third-party complaint shall contain a demand for the relief to which the pleader deems himself entitled. Relief in the alternative or of several different types may be demanded. Except as provided in section 3215, the court may grant any type of relief within its jurisdiction appropriate to the proof whether or not demanded, imposing such terms as