|
Abstract
| Granted: |
Friday, January 7, 2005 |
| Argument: |
Monday, April 18, 2005
|
| Decision: |
Monday, June 13, 2005 |
| Issues: |
Judicial Power, Federal Question |
|
Advocates
|
Facts of the Case
The IRS seized property owned by Grable and gave Grable notice by certified mail before selling the property to Darue. Grable sued in state court, claiming Darue's title was invalid because federal law required the IRS to give Grable notice of the sale by personal service, not certified mail. Darue removed the case to federal disctrict court, arguing that the case presented a federal question because Grable's claim depended on an interpretation of federal tax law. The district court agreed and ruled for Darue. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the decision.
Question
Did a case involving the interpretation of federal tax law belong in federal court and not the state court where it was filed?
Conclusion
Yes. In a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice David Souter, the Court held that the case involved a federal question and could thus be removed to federal court. Federal-questions jurisdiction, the Court reasoned, lay over some state-law claims that implicated significant federal issues. In this case, the national interest in providing a federal forum for federal tax litigation warranted moving the case to federal court.