Bernhard v. Whitney National Bank

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a complaint must raise an “essential element of a federal right” to present a federal question on its face
• noting that Congress did not “completely preempt claims relating to electronic fund transfers”
• “[A] federal court has original or removal jurisdiction only if a federal question appears on the face of the plaintiff’s well-pleaded complaint ....”
• “In fact, we have said that the artful pleading doctrine applies only where state law is subject to complete preemption.”
• “Federal question jurisdiction therefore exists where, because state law is completely preempted, ‘there is, in short, no such thing as a state-law claim.’” (citation omitted)
• “[Section] 10:4–406 applies by its terms to ‘an item’ which is defined as a written promise or order to pay money”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).