28 U.S.C. § 1337 — Commerce and antitrust regulations; amount in controversy, costs
submitted 78 years ago by ch. 646 to r/title-28-JUDICIARY-AND-JUDICIAL-PROCEDURE · 199 words · no verdicts yet
A translation hasn’t been published for this section yet. The official text below is complete and authoritative.
The district* courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action or proceeding arising under any Act of Congress regulating commerce or protecting trade and commerce against restraints and monopolies: Provided, however, That the district courts shall have original jurisdiction of an action brought under section 11706 or 14706 of title 49, only if the matter in controversy for each receipt or bill of lading exceeds $10,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
Except when express provision therefor is otherwise made in a statute of the United States, where a plaintiff who files the case under section 11706 or 14706 of title 49, originally in the Federal courts is finally adjudged to be entitled to recover less than the sum or value of $10,000, computed without regard to any setoff or counterclaim to which the defendant may be adjudged to be entitled, and exclusive of any interest and costs, the district court* may deny costs to the plaintiff and, in addition, may impose costs on the plaintiff.
The district courts shall not have jurisdiction under this section of any matter within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of International Trade under chapter 95 of this title.
Source credit: (June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 931; Pub. L. 95–486, § 9(a), Oct. 20, 1978, 92 Stat. 1633; Pub. L. 96–417, title V, § 505, Oct. 10, 1980, 94 Stat. 1743; Pub. L. 97–449, § 5(f), Jan. 12, 1983, 96 Stat. 2442; Pub. L. 104–88, title III, § 305(a)(3), Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 944.)
- 1948Enacted · Act of June 25, 1948, ch. 646 · 62 Stat. 931
- 1978Amended · Pub. L. 95-486 · 92 Stat. 1633
- 1980Amended · Pub. L. 96-417 · 94 Stat. 1743
- 1983Amended · Pub. L. 97-449 · 96 Stat. 2442
- 1995Amended · Pub. L. 104-88 · 109 Stat. 944
A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by ch. 646 on 1948-06-25.
all 0 arguments · sorted by: best
no arguments yet — make the first case