Selecting an attorney for legal cases is a very important decision. Please enter your information below to receive a Free Consultation from an attorney in your area:
Federal Law News
Federal Courts May Decide Cases That Involve The United States Government
Before a federal court can hear a case, or “exercise its jurisdiction,” certain conditions must be met. First, under the Constitution, federal courts exercise only “judicial” powers. This means that federal judges may interpret the law only through the resolution of actual legal disputes, referred to in Article III of the Constitution as “Cases or Controversies.” A court cannot attempt to correct a problem on its own initiative, or to answer a hypothetical legal question.
Second, assuming there is an actual case or controversy, the plaintiff in a federal lawsuit also must have legal “standing” to ask the court for a decision. That means the plaintiff must have been aggrieved, or legally harmed in some way, by the defendant. Third, the case must present a category of dispute that the law in question was designed to address, and it must be a complaint that the court has the power to remedy.
In other words, the court must be authorized, under the Constitution or a federal law, to hear the case and grant appropriate relief to the plaintiff. Finally, the case cannot be “moot,” that is, it must present an ongoing problem for the court to resolve. The federal courts, thus, are courts of “limited” jurisdiction because they may only decide certain types of cases as provided by Congress or as identified in the Constitution.
Although the details of the complex web of federal jurisdiction that Congress has given the federal courts is beyond the scope of this brief guide, it is important to understand that there are two main sources of the cases coming before the federal courts: “federal question” jurisdiction, and “diversity” jurisdiction.
In general, federal courts may decide cases that involve the United States government, the United States Constitution or federal laws, or controversies between states or between the United States and foreign governments. A case that raises such a “federal question” may be filed in federal court.
Definition:
Courts have adopted the one-day or one-trial system. One day or one trial means that prospective jurors have to come to the court only once.
Trier of fact
Definition:
The factual decision maker of a case. The judge for a bench trial (no jury) or a jury in a jury trial who determine the factual finding of the case as it applies to applicable law.
Controversy
Definition:
A disagreement or a dispute that requires a definitive determination of how the law applies to the facts that are asserted to be true.
If you live in the following cities and need an federal attorney you should contact
our Federal Attorney as soon as possible:
Arlington
Auburn
Bellevue
Bellingham
Bothell
Bremerton
Edmonds
Everett
Federal Way
Kennewick
Kent
Kirkland
Lacey
Longview
Lynnwood
Marysville
Moses Lake
Oak Harbor
Olympia
Pasco
Port Orchard
Redmond
Renton
Richland
Seattle
Shelton
Snohomish
Spanaway
Spokane
Sumner
Tacoma
Vancouver
Walla Walla
Wenatchee
Woodinville
Yakima
Legal Disclaimers All attorney listings are a paid attorney advertisement, and do not in any way constitute a referral or endorsement by an approved or authorized lawyer referral service. The information provided on Washington Federal Lawyers.com is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys
general information related to legal issues commonly encountered. Your access
to and use of this website is subject to additional Terms
and Conditions.
Local Professional? Generate new business today
Call 866-227-9356 or contact a sales rep
Did You Know?