Add to ORKGThe United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has held that in a limited partnership the citizenship of both the general and limited partners shall be counted for federal diversity jurisdiction, precluding such federal jurisdiction when complete diversity is absent between all members of the limited partnership and the opposing party. Carlsberg Resources Corp. v. Cambria Savings and Loan Association, 554 F.2d 1254 (3d Cir. 1977)
The Act of Congress of April 20, 1940, provided that district courts should exercise original jurisd...
A recent congressional amendment of federal district court jurisdictional requirements for both dive...
In an effort to eliminate duplicative and wasteful litigation in both federal and state courts, rece...
The United States Supreme Court held that, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, the citizenship o...
Article discusses the Uniform Limited Partnership Act (ULPA) which removed the ability of limited pa...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New York, instituted a stockholder\u27s suit on behalf of a New York corpora...
This Note examines how these two policy decisions changed the landscape of diversity jurisdiction fo...
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia corporation, sued defendant, a Nebraska corporation, in the Munici...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New Jersey, commenced a personal injury action in the federal district court...
Plaintiff brought action against defendant railroad in the federal district court for New Jersey dis...
The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizen...
Must a federal court obtain the power to bind a party before her citizenship becomes relevant to div...
The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizen...
The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizen...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, was trustee under a mortgage deed to secure a bond issue executed...
The Act of Congress of April 20, 1940, provided that district courts should exercise original jurisd...
A recent congressional amendment of federal district court jurisdictional requirements for both dive...
In an effort to eliminate duplicative and wasteful litigation in both federal and state courts, rece...
The United States Supreme Court held that, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, the citizenship o...
Article discusses the Uniform Limited Partnership Act (ULPA) which removed the ability of limited pa...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New York, instituted a stockholder\u27s suit on behalf of a New York corpora...
This Note examines how these two policy decisions changed the landscape of diversity jurisdiction fo...
Plaintiff, a District of Columbia corporation, sued defendant, a Nebraska corporation, in the Munici...
Plaintiff, a citizen of New Jersey, commenced a personal injury action in the federal district court...
Plaintiff brought action against defendant railroad in the federal district court for New Jersey dis...
The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizen...
Must a federal court obtain the power to bind a party before her citizenship becomes relevant to div...
The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizen...
The rules that make the federal courts available for the resolution of controversies between citizen...
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, was trustee under a mortgage deed to secure a bond issue executed...
The Act of Congress of April 20, 1940, provided that district courts should exercise original jurisd...
A recent congressional amendment of federal district court jurisdictional requirements for both dive...
In an effort to eliminate duplicative and wasteful litigation in both federal and state courts, rece...