Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 111: Listen and Learn -- Introduction to Supplemental Jurisdiction (Civ Pro)
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 263: Listen and Learn -- Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Federal courts can adjudicate state-law claims arising out of the same facts as federal-law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, but what happens if, after removal, the plaintiff amends her complaint to remove the federal questions...more
On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States in Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc., et al. v. Wullschleger et al., upheld the Eighth Circuit’s decision, holding that when a plaintiff amends their complaint and deletes...more
In the Supreme Court’s latest opinion, Royal Canin U.S.A. Inc. v. Wullschleger, the court takes us back to basics on the basis for federal question and supplemental jurisdiction....more
In a seminal opinion, the United States Supreme Court held that a case removed on federal question grounds is properly remanded when the plaintiff amends his or her complaint and dismisses the federal claims. What is the...more
On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a unanimous decision in Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger, No. 23–677, holding that when a case alleging both state and federal claims is removed to...more
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), a plaintiff may bring strictly state-based claims in federal district court if they are related to a claim over which the district court has original jurisdiction. This is more commonly known as...more
On January 22, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Artis v. District of Columbia, No. 16-640, that 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d) suspends the statutes of limitations on state law claims while those claims are pending in federal court....more
On January 22, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its first 5-4 merits decision of the term in Artis v. District of Columbia. In this opinion, the Court held that bringing state claims in federal court stops the clock on the...more
On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 opinion in Artis v. District of Columbia, Case No. 16-460, clarifying the application of 28 U.S.C. section 1367(d)....more
In a 5 to 4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that any statute of limitations applicable to an employee’s state law claims are suspended during the pendency of a federal lawsuit in which the state law claims are...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions yesterday: National Assn. of Mfrs. v. Department of Defense, No. 16-299: In 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers...more