Also known as: federal courts
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A judicial tribunal established by the United States government under Article III of the Constitution or by federal statute. It exercises original or appellate jurisdiction over cases arising under federal law, the Constitution, or treaties and over controversies between citizens of different states when the amount in controversy is met.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Farid Farahani and other tenants sued Horizon Management in federal district court. They alleged that joint inspections by company employees and federal housing officers violated their Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights and sought damages directly under those provisions. Horizon moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court denied the motion because the complaint asserted a right to relief grounded in federal constitutional law.
Francois Fortier was indicted in federal court on fraud charges. The government subpoenaed his wife, Fatou Fall, to testify about conversations that occurred during their marriage. Fatou declined to testify. The court ruled that the witness-spouse privilege applied in federal court and could not be overridden by the party spouse.
Flora Ford sued Frontier Capital in federal court after a jury returned a verdict for the defendant. Ford moved for a new trial under Rule 59, citing errors in the admission of evidence and an inconsistent verdict. The district court granted the motion on grounds historically recognized for new trials in actions at law.
Federal agents searched Francesca Fiore's home without a warrant and seized documents used to indict her on tax charges. Fiore moved to suppress the evidence in federal district court. The court granted the motion, holding that the Fourth Amendment violation required exclusion of the evidence.
Felicia Fuentes sued Falcon Dynamics in federal court for breach of contract. After a nonjury trial the judge entered judgment for the defendant. Fuentes moved for a new trial under Rule 59. The court considered whether grounds existed that would support a rehearing in an equity suit.
Flagship Logistics, a State A corporation, sued Ferrum Metals, a State B corporation, in federal district court in State A on a state-law contract claim. The court applied State A substantive law to the dispute under the Erie doctrine rather than any general federal common law.
Federal question jurisdiction exists when the complaint alleges a right to relief directly under the Constitution. The absence of an express remedial provision does not defeat jurisdiction at the pleading stage.
Supporting sources
The witness spouse holds the privilege in federal court and may choose to testify even if the party spouse objects. The privilege applies only during a valid marriage.
…(Supp. 1972). The precise status of criminal abortion laws in some States is made unclear by recent decisions in state and federal courts striking down existing state laws, in whole or in part. [^maj-38]: "Whereas, Abortion, like any other medical procedure, should not be performed when contrary to the best interests of the…
…St. George Tucker, a distinguished Virginia jurist, took part in the Annapolis Convention of 1786, sat on both state and federal courts, and was widely known for his writings on judicial and constitutional subjects. [^maj-4]: Act of July 14, 1798, 1 Stat. 596. [^maj-5]: But see Smith v. California , 361 U. S. 147, 155…
…v. Department of Public Health , 440 Mass. 309, 798 N. E. 2d 941. The decision led to a wave of litigation in state and federal courts challenging state marriage laws. Most state and
…contended that, since there was no statute of the State on the subject, the railroad's duty and liability is to be determined in federal courts as a matter of general law. The trial judge refused to rule that the applicable law precluded recovery. The jury brought in a verdict of $30,000; and the judgment entered thereon was…
…plurality’s decision represents an unwarranted interference with the legislative process. The Constitution does not give the federal courts
Supporting sources
After a jury trial the court may grant a new trial for any reason historically recognized in actions at law in federal court.
Supporting sources
Yes. Evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is inadmissible in federal court.
Supporting sources
After a nonjury trial the court may grant a new trial for any reason historically recognized for a rehearing in a suit in equity in federal court.
Supporting sources
A federal court sitting in diversity applies the substantive law of the state in which it sits, including that state's choice-of-law rules.
Supporting sources