| Hurn v. Oursler | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued February 17, 1933 Decided April 17, 1933 | |
| Full case name | Hurn v. Oursler |
| Citations | 289 U.S. 238 ( more ) 53 S. Ct. 586; 77 L. Ed. 1148 |
| Holding | |
| A significant federal question raised by a suit can give jurisdiction to federal courts. If the federal question is rejected on the merits, the federal court still has jurisdiction to decide the local question on the merits. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Sutherland, joined by Hughes, Van Devanter, McReynolds, Butler, Roberts, Cardozo |
| Concurrence | Brandeis, joined by Stone |
Hurn v. Oursler, 289 U.S. 238 (1933), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a significant federal question raised by a suit can give jurisdiction to federal courts. If the federal question is rejected on the merits, the federal court still has jurisdiction to decide the local question on the merits. [1]
The case being discussed was a copyright infringement suit. [1]
In United States v. United States Gypsum Co. , the Court's majority opinion referred to Hurn v. Oursler in passing. Justice Felix Frankfurter expanded this and recounted the case's background in his concurrence as a key point in his argument. [2]
