M. Nahas & Co., Inc. v. First National Bank of Hot Springs

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining a plaintiff cannot mistakenly or fraudulently avoid federal jurisdiction by “concealing the federal question that would necessarily have appeared if the complaint had been well pleaded”
• “[Federal jurisdiction exists only when a federal question is presented on the face of the plaintiffs properly pleaded complaint.”
• “[F]ederal jurisdiction exists only when a federal question is presented on the face of the plaintiffs properly pleaded complaint.”
• hol complete preemption applies to § 301 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 301
• “[A] defendant is not entitled to remove simply because federal law . . . will provide a . . . complete defense[] to plaintiff’s state law claims.”
• “When plaintiffs action is properly brought under state law, the defendant is not entitled to remove simply because federal law or principles of federal preemption will provide a defense, even a complete defense, to plaintiffs state law claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).