Malone v. United States Postal Service
Brief

Citation. 833 F.2d 128 (9th Cir. 1987) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff sued Defendant for violation of her civil rights. After a mistrial, the Defendant moved to dismiss the case because Plaintiff failed to comply with a pretrial order.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. In determining whether to dismiss a case for failure to comply with a court order, a court must consider (1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation, (2) the court’s need to manage its docket, (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants, (4) the public policy favoring disposition ...

Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Manufacturing
Brief

Citation. 545 U.S. 308 (2005) Brief Fact Summary. Petitioner brought a quiet tile action in state court against Respondent for property claimed and sold by the Internal Revenue Service. Respondent had the case removed.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. State law claims can be removed under federal question jurisdiction when they implicate significant federal issues, unless removing the case would disrupt the division of labor between state and federal courts.     ...

Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.
Brief

Citation. 518 U.S. 415 (1996) Brief Fact Summary. Petitioner sued Respondent for losing 300 of the transparencies of his photographs.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. In cases of diversity jurisdiction, and consistent with the Seventh Amendment, when a federal district court uses New York’s CPLR § 5501(c) to determine excessiveness of a jury award, the appellate court reviews the decision for abuse of discretion.     ...

Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Allapattah Services, Inc.
Brief

Citation. 545 U.S. 546 (2005) Brief Fact Summary. In two separate federal lawsuits, additional plaintiffs to the lawsuit did not meet the required amount in controversy under diversity jurisdiction.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. In a case with multiple plaintiffs, if one plaintiff’s claim meets the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction, federal courts may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over substantially related claims from other plaintiffs even if they do not meet the amount in controversy requirement.     ...

Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
Brief

Citation. 304 U.S. 64 (1938) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff sued Defendant in New York federal court for injuries sustained from a train in Pennsylvania. Defendant argued it was not liable for Plaintiff’s injuries under Pennsylvania common law.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. Applicable state statutory and common law is applied to a case in federal court under diversity jurisdiction unless the issue of the case falls under the U.S. Constitution or an act of Congress.     ...

Chauffeurs, Teamsters & Helpers, Local No. 391 v. Terry
Brief

Citation494 U.S. 558 (1990) Brief Fact Summary. Respondents sued Petitioner for firing them and Petitioners for not fairly representing them after they were fired. Respondent requested money damages and a jury trial and Petitioners argued that there was no right to a jury trial in this type of case.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. Under the Seventh Amendment, parties presenting issues of legal rights and requesting legal relief have a right to a jury trial.     ...

Carey v. Piphus
Brief

Citation435 U.S. 247 (1978) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiffs sued Defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for depriving them of procedural due process when they were suspended from school.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. Without proof of injury, plaintiffs are only entitled to nominal damages in a lawsuit for procedural due process violations.     ...

Boyle v. United States Technologies Corp.
Brief

Citation487 U.S. 500 (1988) Brief Fact Summary. Petitioner sued Respondent for a design defect in the helicopter it built for the United States.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. In cases involving uniquely federal interests, federal law controls over state law.     ...

Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. Westover
Brief

Citation359 U.S. 500 (1959) Brief Fact Summary. Respondent filed a request with the court to prohibit Petitioner from filing a lawsuit. Petitioner filed a counterclaim and cross-claim, requested a jury trial, and sought damages.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. A case that involves both legal and equitable claims is entitled to a jury trial when requested by a party.     ...

Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co.
Brief

Citation559 US 393 (2010) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff brought a class action against Defendant for failure to pay interest on overdue benefits.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. A state law that prevents certain types of damages from being pursued via class action may not limit federal class actions that satisfy the requirements of FRCP Rule 23.     ...

Jones v. Flowers
Brief

Citation547 U.S. 220 (2006) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff failed to pay property taxes after he moved out of his house. After several years of unpaid property taxes, Defendant Wilcox sent two notices, one about the tax delinquency and one about the impending sale of the property, via certified mail, but both were returned as unclaimed. The property was subsequently sold to Defendant Flowers in a private sale. Plaintiff sued Defendants in an Arkansas state court, claiming that the sale of his house violated his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights because he was never� ...

Gunn v. Minton
Brief

Citation133 S. Ct. 1059 (2013) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff brought a malpractice action against Defendant, who had represented Plaintiff in a federal patent infringement action. Plaintiff argued in his malpractice suit that his infringement claim had failed because Defendant failed to raise the “experimental use” exception available under federal patent law. On appeal, the Texas Supreme Court found that the case should have been brought in federal court because Plaintiff’s malpractice claim turned on a question of federal patent law.     Synops ...

Freedom from religion foundation, Inc. v. Emanuel County School System
Brief

Citation109 F.Supp.3d 1353 (2015) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiffs sued Defendants, alleging that Defendants had violated Plaintiffs’ civil rights and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by endorsing prayer in a public-school classroom. The two individual plaintiffs sought leave of court to proceed using pseudonyms, arguing that they needed to remain anonymous in fear of reprisal from the community.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. A party may remain anonymous during the litigation of a matter so long as a substantial privacy right outweigh ...

City of Riverside v. Rivera
Brief

Citation477 U.S. 561 (1986) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiffs challenged the amount of attorney’s fees awarded to Defendants, after Defendants’ successful civil rights actions.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. A party seeking attorney’s fees under the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act of 1976 are entitled to fees corresponding to the number of hours reasonable expended multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate.     ...

Ceglia v. Zuckerberg
Brief

Citation772 F. Supp. 2d 453 (W.D.N.Y. 2011) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff sued Defendants in New York state court. Defendants removed the lawsuit to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. Plaintiff sought to remand the lawsuit back to New York state court.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. For diversity jurisdiction purposes, changing domicile requires residence in a new domicile with intent to remain there indefinitely.     ...

Brown v. Plata
Brief

Citation563 U.S. 493 (2011) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit against Defendant, alleging that California prisons violated the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, which banned cruel and unusual punishment. Following a lengthy trial, a special panel of three federal judges determined that serious overcrowding in California’s 33 prisons was the primary cause for violations of the Eighth Amendment. The court ordered the release of enough prisoners so the inmate population would come within 137.5 percent of the prisons’ total design capacity ...

BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell
Brief

Citation137 S. Ct. 1549 (2017) Brief Fact Summary. Two separate plaintiffs brought two separate lawsuits against Defendant under Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) in Montana. Defendant moved to dismiss both suits, arguing that it was not “at home” in Montana as required for general jurisdiction under Daimler AG v. Bauman. Its motion was granted in one case and denied in the other. After consolidating the cases, the Montana Supreme Court held that Montana courts could exercise general jurisdiction over Defendant because the railroad both “did bus ...

Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States
Brief

Citation. 318 U.S. 363, 63 S.Ct. 573, 87 L.Ed. 838 (1943) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff sued Defendant to recover a forged check accepted by Defendant.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. The rule under Erie Railroad v. Tompkins does not apply in cases involving the rights and obligations of the United States, such as the disbursement of federal funds.     ...

Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete, Inc.
Brief

Citation500 U.S. 614, 111 S.Ct. 2077, 114 L.Ed.2d 660 (1991) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff sued Defendant for negligence after he was injured on their worksite. Defendant used peremptory challenges to remove two Black persons from the jury during voir dire, and the Plaintiff moved to require the Defendant to state a race-neutral reason for the removals.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. Under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, a private litigant in a civil case cannot use peremptory challenges to exclude prospective jurors on the basis o ...

Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins
Brief

Citation304 U.S. 64, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff sued Defendant in New York federal court for injuries sustained from a train in Pennsylvania. Defendant argued it was not liable for Plaintiff’s injuries under Pennsylvania common law.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. Applicable state statutory and common law is applied to a case in federal court under diversity jurisdiction unless the issue of the case falls under the U.S. Constitution or an act of Congress.     ...

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

Citation545 U.S. 546, 125 S.Ct. 2611, 162 L.Ed.2d 502 (2005) Brief Fact Summary. In two separate federal lawsuits, additional plaintiffs to the lawsuit did not meet the required amount in controversy under diversity jurisdiction.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. In a case with multiple plaintiffs, if one plaintiff’s claim meets the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction, federal courts may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over substantially related claims from other plaintiffs even if they do not meet the amount in controversy ...

Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie
Brief

Citation452 U.S. 394, 101 S.Ct. 2424, 69 L.ed.2d 103 (1981) Brief Fact Summary. Respondents separately sued Petitioner for treble damages, following a government lawsuit against Petitioner. Respondents cases were consolidated in federal court.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. Res judicata precludes the same parties from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in the previous action.     ...

Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.
Brief

Citation518 U.S. 415, 116 S.Ct. 2211, 135 L.Ed.2d 659 (1996) Brief Fact Summary. Petitioner sued Respondent for losing 300 of the transparencies of his photographs.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. In cases of diversity jurisdiction and consistent with the Seventh Amendment, when a federal district court uses New York’s CPLR § 5501(c) to determine excessiveness of a jury award, the appellate court reviews the decision for abuse of discretion.     ...

Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering and Manufacturing
Brief

Citation545 U.S. 308, 125 S.Ct. 2363, 162 L.Ed.2d 257 (2005) Brief Fact Summary. Petitioner brought a quiet tile action in state court against Respondent for property claimed and sold by the Internal Revenue Service. Respondent had the case removed.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. State law claims can be removed under federal question jurisdiction when they implicate significant federal issues, unless removing the case would disrupt the division of labor between state and federal courts.     ...

Lexecon, Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach
Brief

Citation523 U.S. 26, 118 S.Ct. 956, 140 L.Ed.2d 62 (1998) Brief Fact Summary. Petitioner sued Respondent for malicious prosecution in Illinois. The case was transferred to Arizona under 28 U.S.C. § 1407(a). Petitioner moved to have the case remanded to Illinois and Respondent asked the Arizona court to transfer the case to itself.     Synopsis of Rule of Law. A federal court, conducting pretrial proceedings of a case under 28 U.S.C. § 1407(a), does not have authority to transfer the case to itself for trial under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). & ...