Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

complete-preemption doctrine

Read a random definition: statement of claim

A quick definition of complete-preemption doctrine:

The complete-preemption doctrine is a rule that says a federal law can be so powerful that it can turn a state law complaint into a federal one. This means that even if someone files a complaint in state court, it might be treated as a federal case because of the federal law involved. A complaint is a legal document that starts a lawsuit and explains what the person filing the lawsuit wants. A well-pleaded complaint is one that has all the necessary information for the court to understand the case.

A more thorough explanation:

The complete-preemption doctrine is a rule that states that a federal law can be so powerful that it can turn a state law complaint into a federal claim. This means that even if a complaint is filed in state court, it can be treated as a federal claim because of the federal law's preemptive force.

  • If a state law conflicts with a federal law, the federal law will take precedence. For example, if a state law allows the use of a certain drug that is banned by federal law, the federal law will be enforced instead.
  • If a state law complaint involves an issue that is covered by a federal law, the complaint can be treated as a federal claim. For example, if a state law complaint involves a violation of a federal employment law, the complaint can be treated as a federal claim.

These examples illustrate how the complete-preemption doctrine can apply in different situations. In both cases, the federal law takes precedence over the state law, and the complaint can be treated as a federal claim because of the federal law's preemptive force.

complete ownership | complete property

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
i've been away for a while what were the most recent waves? any this week?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.