← All Authorities
United States Leading Case statements of case

Caterpillar Inc v Williams

482 U.S. 386 (1987)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year1987
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Federal question jurisdiction is governed by the well-pleaded complaint rule; a federal preemption defense alone does not confer federal jurisdiction.

Key Principle

The well-pleaded complaint rule governs federal question jurisdiction; a defense of federal preemption does not create federal jurisdiction.

Area of Law

procedure

Related Cases

Getswift Ltd v Webb (2022) 276 CLR 553

High Court of Australia held there is no power to make a common fund order in favour of litigation funders at the interlocutory stage of a class action.

UBS AG v Tyne (2018) 265 CLR 77

Anshun estoppel bars relitigation where it was unreasonable not to raise the issue in earlier proceedings; re-litigation may also constitute abuse of process.

Palmer v Ayres (2017) 259 CLR 478

High Court of Australia held the reflective loss principle (Prudential Assurance rule) does not apply in Australia, permitting shareholders to recover losses independently of the company.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Caterpillar Inc v Williams and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Caterpillar Inc v Williams