George Sutherland, Hurn v. Oursler — Opinion of the Court
“ It is hardly necessary to say that a federal court is without the judicial power to entertain a cause of action not within its jurisdiction, merely because that cause of action has mistakenly been joined in the complaint with another which is within its jurisdiction. ”
George Sutherland, Hurn v. Oursler — Opinion of the Court
“ The number and variety of the facts alleged do not establish more than one cause of action so long as their result, whether they be considered severally or in combination, is the violation of but one right by a single legal wrong. * * * 'The facts are merely the means, and not the end. They do not constitute the cause of action, but they show its existence by making the wrong appeal." Thus tested, the claims of infringement and of unfair competition averred in the present bill of complaint are not separate causes of action, but different grounds asserted in support of the same cause of action. ”
George Sutherland, Hurn v. Oursler — Opinion of the Court
“ The court below proceeded upon the theory that the allegations of the bill in respect of infringement presented a substantial federal question. Certainly, the question is not plainly unsubstantial; and the jurisdiction of the federal court was rightly upheld. Disposal of the infringement, therefore, on the merits was proper; and the precise question for determination is whether the claim of unfair competition was properly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, or, likewise, should have been considered and disposed of on the merits. ”
