Federal Case

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “[t]he court has a 8 continuing obligation to assess its own subject-matter jurisdiction, even if the issue is neglected 9 by the parties”
• asserting that a court “has 2 a continuing obligation to assess its own subject-matter jurisdiction.”
• providing that \[t]he forum state's procedural statute or rule defining the real party in interest concept is not applicable . . . the federal courts are concerned only with that portion of state law from which the specific right being sued upon stems\ (citation and emphasis omitted)
• noting the court’s obligation to consider sua sponte whether it has subject matter jurisdiction
• providing that “[t]he forum state’s procedural statute or rule defining the real party in interest concept is not applicable . . . the federal courts are concerned only with that portion of state law from which the specific right being sued upon stems” (citation and emphasis omitted)
• considering substantive state law for purposes of Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).