Louisville & Interurban Railroad v. Roemmele

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “later elimination of federal claims and defenses, so as to leave standing only state-law claims, may bear on whether the Court chooses to exercise supplemental jurisdiction”
• noting that post-removal amendments bear on courts’ exercise of supplemental jurisdiction
• noting, in connection with remand motion, that a plaintiff may not amend complaint by pleading new facts in a brief
• “It is . . . well-settled that a colorable federal government-contractor defense supplies a basis for removal in personal injury cases based on alleged exposure to asbestos.”
• “The later elimination of federal claims and defenses, so as to leave standing only state-law claims, may bear on whether the Court chooses to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, but it does not eliminate federal jurisdiction.”
• “The later elimination of federal claims and defenses, so as to leave standing only state-law claims, may bear on whether the Court chooses to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, but it does not eliminate federal jurisdiction.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).