Bermudez v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development
District Court, C.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
FEESS, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This motion resurrects the specter of “derivative jurisdiction,” which was a doctrine that required a federal court to dismiss a removed case if the state court originally lacked jurisdiction. Under the theory of “derivative jurisdiction,” a federal court’s jurisdiction derived from the state court’s jurisdiction. If the state court never had jurisdiction, the case was essentially void ab initio and the federal court was required to dismiss even if the case could originally have been filed in federal court.
Fortunat…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Pt United Can Company Ltd. v. Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc., F/k/a Continental Can Company Richard Krzyzanowski John W. ConwayCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Ethridge V. Harbor House RestaurantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Greenberg v. GIANNINICourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Paul Guidry v. John DurkinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- State of Nebraska, Ex Rel., Department of Social Services Internal Revenue Service v. David A. BentsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Superior CourtDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2007
- Glass v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 2008
- Cobell v. NortonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2002