Frances v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

27 federal appellate · 3 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Except as otherwise expressly provided by Act of Congress, any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending. For purposes of removal under this chapter, the citizenship of defendants sued under fictitious names shall be disregarded.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gaylon L. Harrell v. John W. Turner & Tim Huyett · 960 F. Supp. 952 - Lowery v. Prince George's County, Md.

2. “if even one claim in an action is jurisdictionally barred from the federal court by a state's sovereign immunity, or does not fit within the original or supplemental (see 28 U.S.C. § 1367) jurisdiction of the federal courts, then as a consequence of § 1441(a), the whole action cannot be removed to federal court.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 926 F. Supp. 166 - Flores v. Long · International College of Surgeons v. City of Chicago

3. “By the plain meaning of § 1441(a), an action that contains claims barred by sovereign immunity, cannot, in whole or in part, be removed from the state courts to a federal forum because it is not an action within the original jurisdiction of the district courts.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Estate of Porter ex rel. Nelson v. Illinois · International College of Surgeons v. City of Chicago