Bender v. Jordan’s Empirical Analysis
623 F.3d 1128 · 2010
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1367
Relies on Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Grable & Sons Metal Products Inc. Darue Engineering & Mfg. · Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. v. McVeigh · Carducci v. Regan · Jackson Transit Authority v. Local Division 1285, Amalgamated Transit Union
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[f]ederal jurisdiction is disfavored for cases ... which involve substantial questions of state as well as federal law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The Court has said that this depends on such factors as the strength of the federal interest in a federal forum to resolve questions of federal law and whether federal jurisdiction would “materially affect” the “normal currents of litigation.” [Grable, 545 U.S.] at 315, 319, 125 S.Ct. 2363 . Federal jurisdiction is favored in cases that present “a nearly ‘pure issue of law’ ... ‘that could be settled once and for all and thereafter would govern numerous ... cases.’ ” Empire Healthchoice, 547 U.S. at 700 , 126 S.Ct. 2121 (quoting Richard H. Fallon, Jr., Daniel J. Meltzer, & Daniel L. Shapiro, Hart & Wechsler’s The Federal Courts and the Federal System 65 (2005 Supp.)). Conversely, federal jurisdiction is disfavored for cases that are “fact-bound and situation-specific” or which involve substantial questions of state as well as federal law. Empire Healthchoice, 547 U.S. at 701 , 126 S.Ct. 2121 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Although breach of contract is a state law cause of action, the agreements themselves are ‘creatures of federal law,’ in the sense of being intended to implement the scheme designed by 12 C.F.R. § 545.121 . The [parties] entered into the agreements because federal law requires the execution of such contracts before legal fees can be advanced to defendant officers and directors. And the parties’ legal duties turn almost entirely on the proper interpretation of that regulation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.