Citation network
Carden Vs. Arkoma Assocs.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 1990
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Carden v. ArkomaSearch
-
Assocs. - 494 U.S. 185 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Carden v. ArkomaSearch
-
Assocs., 494 U.S. 185 (1990) Carden v. ArkomaSearch
-
to other artificial entities. Chapman v. BarneySearch
-
Steelworkers v. R.HSearch
-
Bouligny, Inc., 382 U. S. 145 , 382 U. S. 151 . Puerto Rico v. RussellSearch
-
Co., 288 U. S. 476 . Navarro Savings Assn. v. LeeSearch
-
can invoke diversity jurisdiction based on the citizenship of some but not all of its members. Bank of United States v. DeveauxSearch
-
Cranch 61, 9 U. S. 90 -91, Marshall v. BaltimoreSearch
-
of citizenship. See Strawbridge v. CurtissSearch
-
Bank of United States v. DeveauxSearch
-
C.R. Co. v. LetsonSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
should be presumed conclusively to be citizens of the corporation's State of incorporation. Marshall v. BaltimoreSearch
-
to be discussed presently) just as firmly resisted extending that treatment to other entities. For example, in Chapman v. BarneySearch
-
Id. at 129 U. S. 682 . Similarly, in Great Southern Fire Proof Hotel Co. v. JonesSearch
-
Id. at 177 U. S. 457 . As recently as 1965, our unanimous opinion in Steelworkers v. R.HSearch
-
the doctrinal wall of Chapman v. BarneySearch
-
not be breached. The one exception to the admirable consistency of our jurisprudence on this matter is Puerto Rico v. RussellSearch
-
U. S. 191 Arkoma claims to have found another exception to our Chapman tradition in Navarro Savings Assn. v. LeeSearch
-
U.S. at 177 U. S. 453 (quoting Mansfield, C. & L.M.R. Co. v. SwanSearch
-
How. 497 (1844), that the corporation has its own citizenship. See Great Southern Fire Proof Hotel v. JonesSearch
-
i.e., which parties have control over the subject of and litigation over the controversy. See Marshall v. BaltimoreSearch
-
Ante at 494 U. S. 197 . That assertion is insupportable in light of Navarro Savings Assn. v. LeeSearch
-
trust must be considered for purposes of diversity jurisdiction) Page 494 U. S. 199 and even Steelworkers v. R.HSearch
-
See also Bank of United States v. DeveauxSearch
-
The starting point for any analysis of who must be counted for purposes of diversity jurisdiction is Strawbridge v. CurtissSearch
-
of different States. Complete diversity, however, is not constitutionally mandated. See State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. TashireSearch
-
of the class would destroy complete diversity or to the class members' particular stake in the controversy. See Snyder v. HarrisSearch
-
Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. KrogerSearch
-
The Real Party in Interest as a Jurisdictional Rule, 56 Texas L.Rev. 243, 247-250 (1978). In Wormley v. WormleySearch
-
Id. at 21 U. S. 451 (footnote omitted). See also Wood v. DavisSearch
-
that the citizenship of each shareholder must be counted for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. Bank of United States v. DeveauxSearch
-
an even stronger case for recognizing a corporation as a proper party in its own right before the Court. See Marshall v. BaltimoreSearch
-
Charleston R. Co. v. LetsonSearch
-
each association held equivalent power and control over the association's assets, business, and litigation. In Chapman v. BarneySearch
-
the real parties to the controversy. The Court applied a similar approach in Great Southern Fire Proof Hotel Co. v. JonesSearch
-
who, among the partners, were the real parties to the controversy. Page 494 U. S. 204 In Steelworkers v. R.HSearch
-
person, and therefore, not a citizen for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. See Mesa Operating Limited Partnership v. LouisianaSearch
-
of the real party to the controversy test was appropriate, the Court unanimously applied it. See Navarro Savings Assn. v. LeeSearch
-
us were correct, ante at 494 U. S. 187 -188, n. 1., then we seriously erred in Navarro Savings Assn. v. LeeSearch
-
Colonial Realty Corp. v. BacheSearch
-
the case does not directly relate to the issue before us, the Court takes pains to address and distinguish Puerto Rico v. RussellSearch
-
Ames v. DowningSearch
-
history of the limited partnership in this country and abroad to assert that it appears 25 years after Steelworkers v. R.HSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Carden v. ArkomaSearch
-
Puerto Rico v. RussellSearch
-
Marshall v. BaltimoreSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial