Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 243 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Jennifer Gasch and Tammy Gasch, as Next Friend to Z.G., a Minor v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company and Karen Frazier.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jennifer Gasch and Tammy Gasch, as Next Friend to Z.G., a Minor v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company and Karen Frazier Anchor | green | “any doubt about the propriety of removal must be resolved in favor of remand.” | 45 |
| 2 | Settlement Funding, L.L.C. v. Rapid Settlements, Ltd. | green | “federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction.” | 37 |
| 3 | Kelli Smallwood v. Illinois Central Railroad Company Mississippi Department of Transportation | green | “(1) actual fraud in the pleading of jurisdictional facts, or (2) inability of the plaintiff to establish a cause of action against the non-diverse party in state court.” | 35 |
| 4 | Kelli Smallwood v. Illinois Central Railroad Company Mississippi Department of Transportation | green | “whether the defendant has demonstrated that there is no possibility of recovery by the plaintiff against an in-state defendant, which stated differently means that there is no reasonable basis for the district court to predict that the plaintiff might be able to recover against …” | 32 |
| 5 | Jennifer Gasch and Tammy Gasch, as Next Friend to Z.G., a Minor v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company and Karen Frazier | green | “strictly construed, and any doubt about the propriety of removal must be resolved in favor of remand.” | 21 |
| 6 | Settlement Funding, L.L.C. v. Rapid Settlements, Ltd. | green | “must presume that a suit lies outside this limited jurisdiction, and the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction rests on the party seeking the federal forum.” | 21 |
| 7 | Jennifer Gasch and Tammy Gasch, as Next Friend to Z.G., a Minor v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company and Karen Frazier | green | “be strictly construed, and any doubt about the propriety of removal must be resolved in favor of remand.” | 20 |
| 8 | McLaughlin v. Mississippi Power Co. | green | “the concept . . . that all persons on one side of the controversy be citizens of different states than all persons on the other side.” | 18 |
| 9 | McLaughlin v. Mississippi Power Co. | green | “the concept of complete diversity requires that all persons on one side of the controversy be citizens of different states than all persons on the other side.” | 14 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.