Cluster 524642 (1989)
green
· 280 citation events
across 37 courts.
Showing the 50 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198920072026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Riley v. F A Richard & Assoc (2002)
Co. of Pittsburgh, 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989).
green
Joyce Johnson v. MFA Petroleum Company (2012)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1165 (5th Cir. 1989).
green
Timothy A. Rogers, Wendy A. Rogers, and Alan Westfall, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situa… (2002)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1164-65 (5th Cir.1989); Railway Labor Executives Ass’n, 858 F.2d at 942 .
green
Rogers, Timothy A. v. Tyson Foods Inc (2002)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1164-65 (5th Cir. 1989); Railway Labor Execu- tives Ass’n, 858 F.2d at 942.
green
Spellman v. Meridian Bank (1995)
Nahas, 930 F.2d at 612 (finding congressional intent complete preemption based on Congress' creation of an exclusive federal remedy in § the National Bank Act); Trans World Airlines v. Mattox, 897 F.2d 773 , 787 (5th Cir. (finding congressional intent to create complete preemption based on Congress' desi maintain uniformity in the law and to "avoid the confusion and burdens that would r if interstate and international airlines were required to respond to standards of individ…
"[T]he parties have not pointed to, nor hav found, any expression in the statute or the legislative history of congressional in apply something similar to the Avco exception."
green
D & J Invst of Cenla v. Baker Hughes (2022)
Co. of Pittsburgh, 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989); B., Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co., 663 F.2d 545, 548 (5th Cir. Unit A Dec. 1981). 16 818 F.3d 193, 210 (5th Cir. 2016). 9 Case: 21-30523 Document: 00516511164 Page: 10 Date Filed: 10/17/2022 No. 21-30523 merits determinations but jurisdictional ones.
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir.1989).
green
Alvarez v. Midland Credit Management, Inc. (2009)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir.1989) (“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”).
green
In Re: Beazley Ins (2009)
Co. of Pittsburgh, 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989) (“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on [interlocutory] appeal.”). 14 In re Volkswagen, 545 F.3d at 319 .
“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on [interlocutory] appeal.”
green
Stevens v. Ford Motor Co. (2004)
Co. of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir.1989); see Wright, Miller & Cooper, Federal Practice & Procedure 2d § 3914.11.
green
Ingram v. Union Carbide Corp (2002)
Group, 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989).
green
Genusa v. Asbestos Corp. (2014)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157 , 1164-65 (5th Cir.1989) (doctrine of complete preemption does not apply to claims under the LHWCA); see also Abt. v. Dickson Equipment Co., Inc., No. G-06-129, 2006 WL 1751897 (S.D.Tex.
“Jurisdiction does not arise under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (“LHWCA”
green
Palermo v. Letourneau Technologies, Inc. (2008)
Aaron, 876 F.2d at 1164-65.
green
Rogers v. American Airlines, Inc. (2001)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1164 (5th Cir.1989).
green
Giddens v. Hometown Financial Services (1996)
See also Aaron, 876 F.2d at 1165 (“The LHWCA contains no specific jurisdictional grant similar to those found in ERISA and the LMRA”).
“The LHWCA contains no specific jurisdictional grant similar to those found in ERISA and the LMRA”
green
Homeport Insurance v. McRae (2024)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1165 (5th Cir. 1989).
green
Benham v. Five Point Dental Specialists, Inc. (2024)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir.1989) (“The fact that a federal defense may be raised to the plaintiff’s action, even if both sides concede that the only real question at issue is created by a federal defense, will not suffice to create federal question jurisdiction.”). circumstances, courts may award attorney’s fees under Section 1447(c) “only where the removing party lacked an objectively reasonable basis for seeking removal.” Martin v. Franklin Cap.
green
Racca v. EFG General Partner Corp. (2023)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1074 (1990); see also Rivet v. Regions Bank of La., 522 U.S. 470, 475 (1998).
green
Malone v. Russell (2023)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1164 (Sth Cir. 1989)).
green
Shelnutt v. Johnson & Johnson (2022)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989) (“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”)).
“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”
green
Hitchcock v. Johnson & Johnson (2022)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989) (“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”)).
“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”
green
Thick v. Medical Device Business Services Inc (2022)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989) (“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”)).
“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”
green
Altholz v. Johnson & Johnson (2022)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989) (“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”)).
“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”
green
Monical v. Johnson & Johnson (2022)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir. 1989) (“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”)).
“A district court’s denial of a motion to remand is not a final order, and it therefore is not reviewable on appeal.”
green
Stansbury v. McCarty Corporation (2022)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1165 (5th Cir. 1989).
green
Brinker International Inc v. US Foods Inc (2022)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir. 1989) (“The fact that a federal defense may be raised to the plaintiff's action—even if both sides concede that the only real question at issue is created by a federal defense—will not suffice to create federal question jurisdiction.”). b.
“The fact that a federal defense may be raised to the plaintiff's action—even if both sides concede that the only real question at issue is created by a federal defense—will not suffice to create federal question jurisdiction.”
green
Manyweather v. Woodlawn Manor Inc (2021)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir. 1989).
green
Eaton v. Woodlawn Manor Inc (2021)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir. 1989). 5 In fact, the Supreme Court has recognized only three statutes which completely preempt state law: The Labor Management Relations Act, ERISA, and the National Bank Act.
green
Interstate Service Provider, Inc. v. Jordan (2021)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157 , 1161 n.7 (5th Cir. 1989) (“The concept of plaintiff as master of his claim is especially pertinent in removal cases . . . .”).
“The concept of plaintiff as master of his claim is especially pertinent in removal cases . . . .”
green
Parfait v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2019)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160-61 (5th Cir. 1989)(An initial pleading sets forth a removable claim “when [it] reveals on its face that it contains an issue of federal law.”)). 2) But, if the initial pleading does not set forth a removable claim, the defendant must file its notice of removal within 30 days after it receives “a copy of an amended pleading, motion, order or” some “other paper from which it may 15 first be ascertained that the case is one which is has become removable…
An initial pleading sets forth a removable claim “when [it] reveals on its face that it contains an issue of federal law.”
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir.1989) (citing Caterpillar v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 391-92 , 107 S.Ct. 2425 , 96 L.Ed.2d 318 (1987); 28 U.S.C. § 1441 ).
green
Long v. Oakley Fertilizer, Inc. (2014)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1165 (5th Cir.1989).
green
Maitland v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance (2012)
Co. of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir.1989).
green
Meisel v. USA SHADE AND FABRIC STRUCTURES INC. (2011)
The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Company, 228 U.S. 22, 25 , 33 S.Ct. 410 , 57 L.Ed. 716 (1913); see also Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 6 , 123 S.Ct. 2058 , 156 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003); Aaron v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160-61 (5th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1074 , 110 S.Ct. 1121 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1028 (1990).
green
Quintana v. Lightner (2011)
The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Company, 228 U.S. 22, 25 , 33 S.Ct. 410 , 57 L.Ed. 716 (1913); see also Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 6 , 123 S.Ct. 2058 , 156 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003); Aaron v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160-61 (5th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1074 , 110 S.Ct. 1121 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1028 (1990).
green
Olivier Plantation, LLC v. St. Bernard Parish (2010)
Co. of Pittsburg, 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir.1989)(“Thus, the general rule provides that a federal defense to a state law claim does not create removal jurisdiction”).
green
OFFICES AT 2525 McKINNON, LLC v. Ornelas (2010)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1163 (5th Cir.1989); Willy, 855 F.2d at 1166 .
green
In Re Shippers Stevedoring Co. (2008)
Co. of Pitts-burg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1164-65 (5th Cir.1989) (concluding that LHWCA did not so preempt field of state law that state action for wrongful death of the longshoreman had to be recharacterized as stating federal cause of action, as would authorize removal), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1074 , 110 S.Ct. 1121 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1028 (1990); Tex. Employers’ Ins.
green
Deuley v. DynCorp International, Inc. (2008)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157,1166 (5th Cir.1989) (emphasis added).
green
Cisneros v. Sanchez (2005)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir.1989) (citing Avco Corp. v. Aero Lodge No. 735, 390 U.S. 557 , 88 S.Ct. 1235 , 20 L.Ed.2d 126 (1968)).
green
Nordan v. Blackwater Security Consulting, LLC (2005)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1166 (5th Cir.1989) (rejecting argument that LHWCA completely preempts state claims, without reaching the question of defensive preemption).
green
Roybal v. Los Alamos National Bank (2005)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1161 (5th Cir.1989)(“[F]ederal law can so completely preempt a field of state law that the plaintiffs complaint must be recharacterized as stating a federal cause of action.”)(citing Avco Corp. v. Aero Lodge No. 735, 390 U.S. 557 , 88 S.Ct. 1235 , 20 L.Ed.2d 126 (1968)).
green
McSperitt v. Hartford Life Insurance (2005)
The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Company, 228 U.S. 22, 25 , 33 S.Ct. 410 , 57 L.Ed. 716 (1913); see also Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 6 , 123 S.Ct. 2058 , 156 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003); Aaron v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, 876 F.2d 1157, 1160-61 (5th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1074 , 110 S.Ct. 1121 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1028 (1990).
The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Company, 228 U.S. 22, 25 , 33 S.Ct. 410 , 57 L.Ed. 716 (1913); see also Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 6 , 123 S.Ct. 2058 , 156 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003); Aaron v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, 876 F.2d 1157, 1160-61 (5th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1074 , 110 S.Ct. 1121 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1028 (1990).
green
Erlandson v. Liberty Life Assur. Co. of Boston (2004)
The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Company, 228 U.S. 22, 25 , 33 S.Ct. 410 , 57 L.Ed. 716 (1913); see also Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 6 , 123 S.Ct. 2058 , 156 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003); Aaron v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160-61 (5th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1074 , 110 S.Ct. 1121 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1028 (1990).
The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Company, 228 U.S. 22, 25 , 33 S.Ct. 410 , 57 L.Ed. 716 (1913); see also Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1 , 123 S.Ct. 2058, 2062 , 156 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003); Aaron v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg, Pa., 876 F.2d 1157, 1160-61 (5th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1074 , 110 S.Ct. 1121 , 107 L.Ed.2d 1028 (1990).
green
Carson v. H & R BLOCK, INC. (2003)
Aaron, 876 F.2d at 1164-65; see also Rheams v. Bankston, Wright & Greenhill, 756 F.Supp. 1004, 1008 (W.D.Tex.1991).
green
Wells v. Shelter General Insurance (2002)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1164-65 (5th cir.1989).
green
Doerr v. Mobil Oil Corp. (2002)
Co., 876 F.2d 1157, 1165-66 (5th Cir. 1989).
green
Walker v. Atwood Chevrolet-Olds, Inc. (2001)
Co. of Pittsburg, 876 F.2d 1157, 1160 (5th Cir.1989), reh’g denied, 886 F.2d 1314 (5th Cir.1989) (defendant may remove state court action if action could have been filed originally in federal court).