28 U.S.C. § 2105
Section 2105 · Scope of review; abatement
Amended 1 time on record
Applied in 19 court decisions — leading case Coastal Steel Corporation v. Tilghman Wheelabrator Ltd Wheelabrator-Frye Inc (1983)
Most recently applied in 913 F. Supp. 2d 197 - Farasat v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (December 2012)
How often courts cite this section
Court decisions citing this, by year.Markers show enactment, consequential amendments, and circuit splits over this section — watch for a citation surge after a change or a disagreement. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
There shall be no reversal in the Supreme Court or a court of appeals for error in ruling upon matters in abatement which do not involve jurisdiction.
Editorial notes U.S. Code · Office of the Law Revision Counsel
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §879 (R.S. §1011; Feb. 18, 1875, ch. 80, §1, 18 Stat. 318).
The revised language is substituted for the provisions of section 879 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., to avoid any construction that matters of fact are not reviewable in nonjury cases. Such section 879 related to review upon a writ of error which applied only to actions at law. (See Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure limiting the review of questions of fact which renders unnecessary any statutory limitation.)
Rule 7(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure abolished all pleas, and the rules adopted the motion as a substitute therefor.
Words “matters in abatement” were, therefore, substituted for the abolished “plea in abatement” and “plea to the jurisdiction.”
Changes were made in phraseology.