University of South Alabama v. American Tobacco Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that § 1447(c) \is mandatory and may not be disregarded based on speculation about the proceeding's futility in state court\
• holding that if a party is deemed to be “an arm or alter ego of the State,” then diversity jurisdiction “must fail”
• recognizing that “removal jurisdiction raises significant federalism concerns,” and therefore, doubt as to “jurisdiction should be resolved in favor of remand to state court”
• concluding that “the district court should have resolved the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching the merits of any other issue,” and that \the district court erred in failing to first address its power to act\
• stating that a district court “is obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it may be lacking”
• stating that a district court “is obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it may be lacking.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).