Certain types of disputes can be litigated in Federal court, as opposed to state court.
Recent Federal Inheritance Litigation News
The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) is a federal law that sets minimum standards for most voluntarily established retirement and health plans
ERISA is a federal statutory system that governs most corporate retirement plans. At the heart of the operation of an ERISA- governed plan is the
Can a court, carrying out the terms of a will, control the disposition of a non-probate asset? A recent federal case explains that non-probate assets
When suing over issues of personal property, such as golds coins, the plaintiff might want to ensure that the gold coins are not dissipated prior
A recent federal case holds that the personal representative of an estate cannot waive the attorney-client privilege between a guardian and the guardian’s attorney. The
A recent case from the Middle District of Florida confirms the trend of the shrinking probate exception to federal court jurisdiction. The “probate exception” prohibits
Trust Beneficiaries Not Indispensable Party in Trust Lawsuit Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19
The plaintiff sued the trustee, in her fiduciary capacity as well as individually, as a beneficiary. If successful, the trustee’s beneficial interest would have been
Diversity jurisdiction is one of the two primary ways in which to acquire Federal jurisdiction over a controversy. Diversity jurisdiction requires that all plaintiffs be
The purpose of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) is to benefit the interest of employees and their beneficiaries in employee benefit
The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) is a Federal law designed to ensure that private sector employment benefits are administered with a
A Federal court is permitted to hear an inheritance dispute, so long as the case does not run afoul of the probate exception, the Younger
A recent federal estate planning malpractice case is dismissed because of the lack of “privity” between the plaintiff and the drafting attorney. In Martin v.
In order to resolve issues regarding personal jurisdiction the Court will typically analyze two questions. First, whether personal jurisdiction exists over the non-resident defendant under