No federal question jurisdiction
Company: CleanSpark
The claim, verbatim
The court held that the complaint's state-law claims for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment do not necessarily raise a federal issue, so federal question jurisdiction does not attach.
Source (primary)
Smith v. Bradford — Entry #23: ORDER (RECAP, court_filing)
View cached copy (2026-10-26)Live source ↗
Quote: “Because Plaintiff's claims can be supported by alternative and independent theories not dependent on federal, federal question jurisdiction does not attach.”
How we checked this
This claim has not yet been checked assertion-by-assertion against its source. It carries a cited source and quote, but the deeper check has not run. When it does, the result appears here whatever it says.
Additional evidence
confirms Smith v. Bradford — Entry #23: ORDER
Quote: “Because Plaintiff's claims can be supported by alternative and independent theories not dependent on federal, federal question jurisdiction does not attach.”