Mariko L.A. Bennett v. Southwest Airlines Co., the Boeing Company, and City of Chicago

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that federal jurisdiction was lacking because, among other reasons, the plaintiffs did not “challenge the validity of any federal agency’s or employee’s action”
• holding that federal jurisdiction was lacking because, among other reasons, the plaintiffs did not “challenge the validity of any federal agency's or employee's action”
• holding that federal jurisdiction was lacking because, among other reasons, the plaintiffs did not “challenge the validity of any federal agency’s or employee’s action”
• holding that federal jurisdiction was lacking because, among other reasons, the plaintiffs did not “challenge the validity of any federal agency’s or employee’s action”
• holding that federal jurisdiction was lacking when the case required “a fact-specific application of rules that come from both federal and state law rather than a context-free inquiry into the meaning of a federal law”
• finding that that “the dominant role that federal law plays in air transport” does not create federal question jurisdiction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).