Capron v. Van Noorden

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[i]n order to have dismissed [supplemental state-law] claims with prejudice, the district court had to have exercised [subject-matter] jurisdiction over the claims”
• judgment loser successfully raised lack of diversity jurisdiction for the first time before the Supreme Court
• “[I]t [is] the duty of the Court to see that they had jurisdiction, for the consent of the parties could not give it.”
• judgment loser successfully raised lack of diversity jurisdiction for the first time before the Supreme Court
• “[I]t [is] the duty of the Court to see that they had jurisdiction, for the consent of the parties could not give it.”
• judgment loser successfully raised lack of diversity jurisdiction for the first time before the Supreme Court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).