Fitch v. Silva

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the jurisdictional issue of whether complete preemption exists is very different from the substantive inquiry of whether a “preemption defense” may be established
• holding that the Federal Crop Insurance Act of 1978, 7 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1520, lacks “the extraordinary preemptive force necessary for the application of the doctrine of complete preemption”
• recognizing that the doctrine of complete preemption does not have wide applicability because it selves as an “exception to the ‘well-pleaded complaint rule’ which makes the plaintiff the master of his or her complaint”
• expressing no opinion on merits of substantive inquiry of whether a preemption defense may be raised in state court
• affirming federal district court’s dismissal of farmers’ state law claims of negligence and bad faith against insurance agency for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction
• mentioning, in the context of complete preemption and the well-pleaded complaint doctrine, that the FCIA does not preempt all state causes of action pertaining to FCIA-issued crop insurance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).