Natalia Makarova v. United States
- Decided
- January 12, 2000
- Docket
- 1999
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 2,790 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that the party invoking a federal court’s jurisdiction “has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that it exists” — Behrens v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (2024)
- holding that district courts may refer to evidence outside the pleadings when resolving a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction — (untitled) (2026)
- alleging that "[AIG executives] Cassano and Jones agreed with Ofori's impending temporary relocation to South Africa — Ofori-Tenkorang v. American International Group, Inc. (2006)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
McLAUGHLIN, Circuit Judge:
BACKGROUND In 1982, Natalia Makarova was injured when a piece of scenery fell on her shoulder at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. At the time of the injury, Makarova was performing in a production of the musical “On Your Toes,” and a witness for Makarova asserts that she was widely regarded as the world’s best prima ballerina.
The Kennedy Center was the producer of “On Your Toes.” As producer, it: (1) contracted with the estates of the musical’s authors for the right to “produce and present” the show; (2) contracted directly with the director and stage manager; (3) arranged a letter of credit for bond coverage for the show; (4) paid performers throughout the Washington, D.C. run of the show; and (5) maintained workers’ compensation coverage for the show’s performers and workers.
Statutes cited
Cite this
Natalia Makarova v. United States, 201 F.3d 110 (2000)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.