Lucas Goar v. Compania Peruana De Vapores

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that federal law \operates not only to require a jury trial when state law would deny one ... but it also requires trial of certain issues by a judge when state law might allow a jury trial\
• noting that federal law “operates not only to require a jury trial when state law would deny one . . . but it also requires trial of certain issues by a judge when state law might allow a jury trial”
• \[S]uits against foreign states were as unknown to the common law in 1791 as were suits against the United States.\
• \[T]he district court would not have had diversity jurisdiction [over the action against the insurer] even if Goar had not included [the foreign sovereign] as a defendant.\
• foreign sovereigns immune from suit in survey of English and American common law
• “[T]he district court would not have had diversity jurisdiction [over the action against the insurer] even if Goar had not included [the foreign sovereign] as a defendant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).