Hansen v. Harper Excavating, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that \ordinary preemption” is \a federal defense to a state-law claim under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution”
• recognizing that “undisputed court documents and matters of public record” are proper subjects for judicial notice because they are facts “capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned”
• noting that under Rule 201, judicial notice may be taken “whether requested or not,” and “at any stage of the proceeding”
• declining to apply judicial estoppel to the question whether the court had Article III jurisdiction to entertain the claim
• declining to apply judicial estoppel to the question whether the court had Article III jurisdiction to entertain the claim
• \[S]tanding is assessed as of the time of filing of the complaint.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).