Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co.
E354849
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the conflict between federal procedural rules and state laws limiting class actions in federal diversity jurisdiction.
All labels observed (3)
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T3392332 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. Context triple: [Rules Enabling Act, interpretedIn, Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co.]
-
A.
Lucas v. Earl
Lucas v. Earl is a landmark 1930 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that income is taxed to the person who earns it, regardless of contractual arrangements to split or assign that income.
-
B.
Grovey v. Townsend
Grovey v. Townsend was a 1935 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the Texas Democratic Party’s whites-only primary rule, later repudiated as unconstitutional racial discrimination in voting.
-
C.
McDonald v. Smith
McDonald v. Smith is a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the First Amendment’s Petition Clause does not grant absolute immunity from libel suits for statements made in petitions to government officials.
-
D.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
E.
Ray v. Blair
Ray v. Blair is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state's authority to require presidential electors to pledge support for their party's nominees as a condition of appointment.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. Target entity description: Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the conflict between federal procedural rules and state laws limiting class actions in federal diversity jurisdiction.
-
A.
Lucas v. Earl
Lucas v. Earl is a landmark 1930 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that income is taxed to the person who earns it, regardless of contractual arrangements to split or assign that income.
-
B.
Grovey v. Townsend
Grovey v. Townsend was a 1935 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the Texas Democratic Party’s whites-only primary rule, later repudiated as unconstitutional racial discrimination in voting.
-
C.
McDonald v. Smith
McDonald v. Smith is a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the First Amendment’s Petition Clause does not grant absolute immunity from libel suits for statements made in petitions to government officials.
-
D.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
E.
Ray v. Blair
Ray v. Blair is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state's authority to require presidential electors to pledge support for their party's nominees as a condition of appointment.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (35)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
civil procedure case ⓘ class action case ⓘ federal court case ⓘ |
| appliedRule | Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
United States civil procedure
ⓘ
conflict of laws ⓘ federal courts ⓘ |
| citation | 559 U.S. 393 ⓘ |
| context | federal diversity jurisdiction ⓘ |
| country |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2010 ⓘ |
| defendant |
Allstate Insurance Company
ⓘ
linked to:
Allstate
|
| effect | expanded availability of class actions in federal court despite some state restrictions ⓘ |
| holding |
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 applies in federal court and allows a class action even when a state law would bar the class action
ⓘ
a valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure that directly conflicts with state law governs in federal court under the Rules Enabling Act ⓘ |
| issue |
whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 permits a class action in federal court when state law bars such class actions
ⓘ
whether a federal procedural rule valid under the Rules Enabling Act displaces a conflicting state law in diversity cases ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
United States federal courts
ⓘ
linked to:
U.S. federal courts
|
| legalSubject |
Erie doctrine
ⓘ
Rules Enabling Act ⓘ class actions ⓘ conflict between federal rules and state law ⓘ diversity jurisdiction ⓘ federal civil procedure ⓘ |
| plaintiff | Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates ⓘ |
| proceduralPosture | putative class action filed in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction ⓘ |
| questionPresented | Does Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 permit a class action in federal court when a state law prohibits such class actions for the claim at issue? ⓘ |
| relevance |
important precedent on the application of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 in diversity cases
ⓘ
significant case on the relationship between federal procedural rules and state substantive or procedural limitations ⓘ |
| stateLawInvolved |
New York Civil Practice Law and Rules section 901(b)
ⓘ
linked to:
New York Civil Practice Law and Rules
New York law ⓘ |
| termOfCourt | October Term 2009 ⓘ |
| typeOfDispute | insurance dispute ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. Description of subject: Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the conflict between federal procedural rules and state laws limiting class actions in federal diversity jurisdiction.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
Erie doctrine
→
clarifiedByCase
→
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co.
ⓘ
linked to: Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co.
Rules Enabling Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2071–2077
→
interpretedIn
→
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co., 559 U.S. 393 (2010)
ⓘ
linked to: Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co.