Legal Opinion
Gunn v. Minton
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided February 20, 2013No. 11-1118PublishedCited by 2,552 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Roberts
Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over cases “arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents.” 28 U. S. C. § 1338(a). The question presented is whether a state law claim alleging legal malpractice in the handling of a patent case must be brought in federal court.
I
In the early 1990⅛, respondent Vernon Minton developed a computer program and telecommunications network designed to facilitate securities trading. In March 1995, he leased the system—known as the Texas Computer Exchange Network, or TEXCEN—to R. M. Stark & Co., a securities brokerage. A little over a year later, he…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Powell v. McCormackSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2,552 opinions
- Royal Canin U. S. A. v. WullschlegerSupreme Court of the United States · 2025
- Badgerow v. WaltersSupreme Court of the United States · 2022
- Safe Streets Alliance v. HickenlooperCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
- City of Oakland v. Bp P.L.C.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- Pueblo of Jemez v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
2,547 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.