Legal Opinion
Willy v. Coastal Corp.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided March 3, 1992No. 90-1150PublishedCited by 582 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Rehnquist
delivered the- opinion of the Court.
We granted certiorari to decide whether a federal district court may impose sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in a case in which the district court is later determined to be without subject-matter jurisdiction. 501 U. S. 1216 (1991). We conclude that in the circumstances presented here it may do so.
Petitioner Willy sued respondent Coastal Corporation (Coastal or respondent) in Texas state court, raising a variety of claims relating to Coastal’s decision to terminate his employment as “in-house” counsel. Petitioner alleged…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- United States v. United Mine Workers of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Chicot County Drainage District v. Baxter State BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by582 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. BaileySupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Cunningham v. Hamilton CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Cramer v. State of FloridaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1997
- In Re BennettTexas Supreme Court · 1998
577 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.