Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L. P., Et Al.

• 2003 • 541 U.S. 567 • Rehnquist Court
The U.S. Supreme Court case Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., et al., 2003 revolved around the issue of diversity jurisdiction in federal courts. The plaintiff, Atlas Global Group (a partnership formed under Texas law), included a Mexican corporation as one of its partners and filed suit against Grupo Dataflux (a Mexican corporation) in a Federal District Court for breach of contract and fraud claims. However, it was later discovered that at the time when the lawsuit was initiated,...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Rehnquist Court
Term: 2003
Docket: 02-1689
541 U.S. 567
124 S. Ct. 1920
158 L. Ed. 2d 866
2004 U.S. LEXIS 3676
Argued: Mar 03, 2004

Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L. P., Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Questions presented:
SCOTUS Records

02-1689 GRUPO DATAFLUX v. ATLAS GLOBAL GROUP Ruling below: CA 5, 312 F.3d 168. QUESTIONS PRESENTED: I. Did the court of appeals err by creating a new exception to the longstanding rule that diversity jurisdiction must be determined based on a party's citizenship and circumstances as they existed at the time suit was filed? 2. Did the court of appeals err by allowing a unilateral change in a party's citizenship during the course of litigation to create diversity jurisdiction that did not exist at the time suit was filed? CERT. GRANTED: 10/14/03

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court case Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., et al., 2003 revolved around the issue of diversity jurisdiction in federal courts. The plaintiff, Atlas Global Group (a partnership formed under Texas law), included a Mexican corporation as one of its partners and filed suit against Grupo Dataflux (a Mexican corporation) in a Federal District Court for breach of contract and fraud claims. However, it was later discovered that at the time when the lawsuit was initiated, not all partners were American citizens which is required to establish diversity jurisdiction - an essential requirement for hearing cases in federal court instead of state court. Grupo Dataflux argued that since complete diversity did not exist at the time when the lawsuit was filed, thus rendering it ineligible for federal court consideration from inception; therefore any subsequent rulings should be nullified including $40 million judgment awarded to Atlas by jury trial. The Supreme Court agreed with this argument stating that "time-of-filing" rule applies i.e., if there's no complete diversity among parties involved at filing time then such cases are beyond purview of federal courts' authority regardless how circumstances may change afterwards.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., Justice Ginsburg argued that the majority's decision was too rigid and failed to consider practical implications. She contended that a corporation should not be denied access to federal courts simply because it mistakenly identified itself as a U.S. entity when it was actually foreign-owned at the time of filing suit. Ginsburg pointed out that such an error could easily be corrected without dismissing the case entirely, especially since there were no allegations of bad faith or attempts to manipulate jurisdictional rules by Atlas Global Group in this instance. She also emphasized that allowing such cases to proceed would not flood federal courts with litigation from foreign corporations but rather ensure fair treatment for all parties involved.

Opinion written by Justice AScalia
Decided: May 17, 2004
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms