Arbaugh v. Y H Corp.
546 U.S. 500 (2006) Cited 7,864 times 27 Legal AnalysesHolding that Title VII's numerosity requirement is nonjurisdictional even though it serves the important policy goal of “spar[ing] very small businesses from Title VII liability”
Steel Co. v. Citizens for Better Env't
523 U.S. 83 (1998) Cited 10,780 times 15 Legal AnalysesHolding that a court "act ultra vires" when it assumes "hypothetical jurisdiction" in order to rule on the merits
Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.
561 U.S. 247 (2010) Cited 1,465 times 177 Legal AnalysesHolding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction
Miles v. Apex Marine Corp.
498 U.S. 19 (1990) Cited 760 times 21 Legal AnalysesHolding that when Congress incorporated the Federal Employers’ Liability Act ("FELA") into the Jones Act without alteration, it also incorporated the prior judicial interpretation of FELA in the Act, as that interpretation was "well established," and "Congress is aware of existing law when it passes legislation"
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Arabian American Oil Co.
499 U.S. 244 (1991) Cited 622 times 10 Legal AnalysesHolding that the presumption against extraterritorial application of federal statutes prevented an employee fired from work being done in Saudi Arabia from sustaining an anti-discrimination action brought under Title VII
Anchorbank v. Hofer
649 F.3d 610 (7th Cir. 2011) Cited 856 timesFinding that the detailed allegations presented in the complaint stated with particularity the circumstances constituting a scheme to defraud
Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. Miller
486 U.S. 174 (1988) Cited 251 times 1 Legal AnalysesConcluding that "a federally owned facility performing a federal function is shielded from direct state regulation, even though the federal function is carried out by a private contractor, unless Congress clearly authorizes such regulation"
Absolute Activist Value Master Fund Ltd. v. Ficeto
677 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 2012) Cited 217 times 22 Legal AnalysesHolding that the complaint must sufficiently allege domestic purchases to state a claim under § 10(b)
Fiero v. Financial Industry Regulatory
660 F.3d 569 (2d Cir. 2011) Cited 54 times 2 Legal AnalysesFinding significant that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority's (“FINRA”) “reliance upon [alternative] enforcement methods was known to Congress, [but] Congress left that reliance unaltered” in subsequent legislation, in holding that FINRA was “not authorized to enforce the collection of its fines through the courts”
In re Optimal U.S. Litig.
865 F. Supp. 2d 451 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) Cited 8 timesUpholding earlier holding in light of Absolute Activist
Section 78aa - Jurisdiction of offenses and suits
15 U.S.C. § 78aa Cited 2,329 times 19 Legal AnalysesGranting "[t]he district courts of the United States . . . exclusive jurisdiction [over] violations of [the Exchange Act of 1934] or the rules and regulations thereunder, and of all suits in equity and actions at law brought to enforce any liability or duty created by [the Exchange Act of 1934] or the rules and regulations thereunder."
Section 78u - Investigations and actions
15 U.S.C. § 78u Cited 2,264 times 85 Legal AnalysesGranting the SEC the power to seek civil penalties for violations of the Exchange Act