Legal Opinion

Padilla v. AT & T CORP.

District Court, C.D. California

Decided December 21, 2009No. Case SACV 09-0471 AG (ANx)PublishedCited by 202 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND

ANDREW J. GUILFORD, District Judge.

Diversity jurisdiction was embedded in our Constitution by our Founders. The thinking was in part that, for example, in a case involving non-Virginians, a jury of Virginians sitting in federal court would be more likely to follow their oath to be fair than would a jury of Virginians sitting in state court. See Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction 296 (5th ed.2007) (“The traditional theory is that diversity jurisdiction was intended to protect out-of-state residents from the bias that they might experience, or at least fear…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Frank D. Gaus v. Miles, Inc., an Indiana CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  2. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
  3. Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. KrogerSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. SheetsSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  5. Caterpillar Inc. v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1996

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by202 opinions

  1. Rangel v. Bridgestone Retail Operations, LLCDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2016
  2. Warner v. Select Portfolio ServicingDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2016
  3. Sanchez v. Lane Bryant, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2015
  4. Perez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.District Court, N.D. California · 2013
  5. Abramson v. Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2016

197 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API