J u m p t o c o n t e n t
M a i n m e n u
M a i n m e n u
N a v i g a t i o n
● M a i n p a g e ● C o n t e n t s ● C u r r e n t e v e n t s ● R a n d o m a r t i c l e ● A b o u t W i k i p e d i a ● C o n t a c t u s ● D o n a t e
C o n t r i b u t e
● H e l p ● L e a r n t o e d i t ● C o m m u n i t y p o r t a l ● R e c e n t c h a n g e s ● U p l o a d f i l e
S e a r c h
Search
A p p e a r a n c e
● C r e a t e a c c o u n t ● L o g i n
P e r s o n a l t o o l s
● C r e a t e a c c o u n t ● L o g i n
P a g e s f o r l o g g e d o u t e d i t o r s l e a r n m o r e ● C o n t r i b u t i o n s ● T a l k
( T o p )
1 F a c t u a l b a c k g r o u n d
2 D e c i s i o n
3 R e f e r e n c e s
4 E x t e r n a l l i n k s
T o g g l e t h e t a b l e o f c o n t e n t s
S a a d e h v . F a r o u k i
A d d l a n g u a g e s
A d d l i n k s
● A r t i c l e ● T a l k
E n g l i s h
● R e a d ● E d i t ● V i e w h i s t o r y
T o o l s
T o o l s
A c t i o n s
● R e a d ● E d i t ● V i e w h i s t o r y
G e n e r a l
● W h a t l i n k s h e r e ● R e l a t e d c h a n g e s ● U p l o a d f i l e ● S p e c i a l p a g e s ● P e r m a n e n t l i n k ● P a g e i n f o r m a t i o n ● C i t e t h i s p a g e ● G e t s h o r t e n e d U R L ● D o w n l o a d Q R c o d e ● W i k i d a t a i t e m
P r i n t / e x p o r t
● D o w n l o a d a s P D F ● P r i n t a b l e v e r s i o n
A p p e a r a n c e
F r o m W i k i p e d i a , t h e f r e e e n c y c l o p e d i a
Saadeh v. Farouki F.3d 52 (D.C. Cir. 1997), was a case decided in the D.C. Circuit that espoused a narrow reading of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a )[1] diversity jurisdiction .
Factual background [ edit ]
Saadeh, a Greek citizen living in Maryland, sued Farouki, a Jordanian citizen with permanent resident status in Maryland, over an unpaid debt in federal court. The district court found for Saadeh, and Farouki appealed on the merits.
Decision [ edit ]
The court reversed the judgment, citing that the lower federal court lacked jurisdiction because of a lack of diversity. The court reasoned that 28 U.S.C. §1332(a ) was not intended to allow federal jurisdiction over a suit between two non-citizens.[2]
References [ edit ]
^ Yeazell, C. Civil Procedure, 7th Edition. Aspen Publishers, New York, NY, 2008.
External links [ edit ]
R e t r i e v e d f r o m " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saadeh_v._Farouki&oldid=1175149390 " C a t e g o r i e s : ● 1 9 9 7 i n U n i t e d S t a t e s c a s e l a w ● D i v e r s i t y j u r i s d i c t i o n c a s e l a w ● U n i t e d S t a t e s C o u r t o f A p p e a l s f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a C i r c u i t c a s e s H i d d e n c a t e g o r y : ● U s e m d y d a t e s f r o m S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 3
● T h i s p a g e w a s l a s t e d i t e d o n 1 3 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 3 , a t 0 3 : 0 1 ( U T C ) . ● T e x t i s a v a i l a b l e u n d e r t h e C r e a t i v e C o m m o n s A t t r i b u t i o n - S h a r e A l i k e L i c e n s e 4 . 0 ;
a d d i t i o n a l t e r m s m a y a p p l y . B y u s i n g t h i s s i t e , y o u a g r e e t o t h e T e r m s o f U s e a n d P r i v a c y P o l i c y . W i k i p e d i a ® i s a r e g i s t e r e d t r a d e m a r k o f t h e W i k i m e d i a F o u n d a t i o n , I n c . , a n o n - p r o f i t o r g a n i z a t i o n . ● P r i v a c y p o l i c y ● A b o u t W i k i p e d i a ● D i s c l a i m e r s ● C o n t a c t W i k i p e d i a ● C o d e o f C o n d u c t ● D e v e l o p e r s ● S t a t i s t i c s ● C o o k i e s t a t e m e n t ● M o b i l e v i e w
