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.
5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 293 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 Morris v. Princess Cruises.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Morris v. Princess Cruises Anchor | green | “joinder of a non-diverse defendant is deemed fraudulent, and the defendant's presence in the lawsuit is ignored for purposes of determining diversity, 'if the plaintiff fails to state a cause of action against a resident defendant, and the failure is obvious according to the set…” | 118 |
| 2 | Grancare v. Ruth Thrower | green | “must consider . . . whether a deficiency in the complaint can possibly be cured by granting the plaintiff leave to amend.” | 101 |
| 3 | Marin General Hospital v. Modesto & Empire Traction Co. | green | “the burden of establishing federal subject matter jurisdiction falls on the party invoking removal.” | 45 |
| 4 | Sullivan v. First Affiliated Securities, Inc. | green | “a suit may be removed to federal court under 28 u.s.c. 1441 (a) only if it could have been brought there originally.” | 15 |
| 5 | Padilla v. AT & T CORP. | green | “show that there is no possibility that the plaintiff could prevail on any cause of action it brought against the non-diverse defendant” | 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.