EPISODE · Jan 17, 2025 · 10 MIN
Royal Canin USA Inc. v. Wullschleger (Federal Jurisdiction)
from Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) · host Jake Leahy
Send us Fan MailRoyal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger (Decided January 15, 2025)In Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger, the Supreme Court addressed whether a federal court retains supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1367 when a plaintiff amends their complaint to remove all federal claims after a case is removed to federal court.The case arose after Wullschleger sued Royal Canin in state court, asserting both federal and state claims. Following removal to federal court, Wullschleger amended her complaint, eliminating the federal claims and seeking remand to state court. The Court held that when federal claims are removed from an amended complaint, federal courts lose supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims, requiring remand to state court. Justice Kagan, writing for a unanimous Court, emphasized that federal jurisdiction must be assessed based on the operative complaint.Justice Kagan delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.Support the show
Embed this episode
What this episode covers
Send us Fan Mail Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger (Decided January 15, 2025) In Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger, the Supreme Court addressed whether a federal court retains supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1367 when a plaintiff amends their complaint to remove all federal claims after a case is removed to federal court. The case arose after Wullschleger sued Royal Canin in state court, asserting both federal and state claims. Following removal to federal court, Wull...
NOW PLAYING
Royal Canin USA Inc. v. Wullschleger (Federal Jurisdiction)
No transcript for this episode yet
Similar Episodes
No similar episodes found.
Similar Podcasts
No similar podcasts found.