Selected Risks Insurance v. Kobelinski

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant was judicially estopped from asserting subject matter jurisdiction because it had previously won a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
• holding that the defendant was judicially estopped from asserting the existence of subject matter jurisdiction where in a former action, it argued “that the Court lacked jurisdiction”
• “Cases . . . have held that subject matter jurisdiction exists in the district courts pursuant to [§ 634(b)(1
• judicial estoppel is the well[-]established principle that a party may not assert contrary positions in the same or related proceedings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).