FIRE-DEX, LLC v. ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY - Articles

All Content

FIRE-DEX, LLC v. ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Jun 2, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Jonathan D. Hacker, O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Justin S. Greenfelder, BUCKINGHAM, DOOLITTLE & BURROUGHS, LLC, Canton, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Jonathan D. Hacker, O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP, Washington, D.C., David W. Walulik, FROST BROWN TODD, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Justin S. Greenfelder, BUCKINGHAM, DOOLITTLE & BURROUGHS, LLC, Canton, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Laura A. Foggan, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae.

Judge(s): HAPAR, LARSEN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Jurisdiction is power. The power of the federal courts is not unlimited: we are courts of limited jurisdiction. But when we do have jurisdiction over both the subject matter of the case and the parties before us, we must exercise that jurisdiction, except in certain limited circumstances. After all, within the bounds set by the Constitution, it’s Congress’s call just how powerful we should be. Drawing the boundaries of federal courts’ jurisdiction is a policy choice—a choice that the Constitution vests in the political branches. As judges, we respect that choice by exercising jurisdiction that we have and not exercising jurisdiction that we lack. But there are exceptions to the normal rule of mandatory jurisdiction. This case asks us how broad some of those exceptions are and how they interact with one another. Our sister circuits have provided different answers to this question. We have yet to weigh in until now.

Attachments: