Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 332: Listen and Learn -- Removal (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 163: Listen and Learn -- Removal (Civ Pro)
NGE On Demand: The (Dilatory) Forum Defendant Rule and Snap Removal with Nick Graber
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 292: Listen and Learn -- The Erie Doctrine (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 126: Listen and Learn -- The Erie Doctrine
Many defendants prefer federal court to state court. Accordingly, when sued in state court, they will remove whenever possible. This bulletin addresses a wrinkle in the law about when removal is possible....more
For trust and estate litigators, the federal court experience invariably begins – and sometimes ends — with an analysis of the probate exception to federal diversity jurisdiction. Two recent Southern District cases examine...more
A recent EDVA decision reinforced the point that removal to federal court must be based on the existence of either federal question or diversity jurisdiction, but not supplemental jurisdiction....more
Exactly where a court’s jurisdiction begins and ends is a question that has long irked our judicial system. One muddle is the extent to which federal courts, as opposed to state courts, can decide disputes involving a...more
We all know that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. What does that mean in the arbitration context? Something new as of March 31st! Federal courts do not have stand-alone jurisdiction to hear any...more
The common train of thought when litigating as an out-of-state defendant is that it is best to be venued in federal court so as to eliminate any advantage an in-state plaintiff might have with a local jury. Typically, foreign...more
On December 1, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in a pair of related cases presenting questions about the scope of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), a frequent topic of debate before the Court in recent years. In...more
Johnny Cash’s famous “I Walk the Line” song draws a line emphasizing how difficult it can be to stay faithful with temptations “on the road” as the singer travels on tour. Similarly, patent license drafters and litigators can...more
Recently, I was speaking with a client, and we were discussing some of the unique issues subrogation professionals face on a regular basis....more
This month’s key California employment law cases are two decisions from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Chavez v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., 888 F.3d 413 (9th Cir. 2018) - Summary: Amount in controversy for federal...more
When faced with someone who is blowing things out of proportion, one response might be "Don't make a federal case out of this!" Sometimes, it may not even be possible to make a federal case. The reason is that federal...more
In Doermer v. Oxford Fin’l Group, Ltd., No. 17-1659 (7th Cir. Mar. 7, 2018), the Seventh Circuit had before it an example of what Chief Judge Diane Wood called a “depressingly common” type of litigation: “[f]amily disputes...more
If a putative class of plaintiffs, all citizens of State A, sues a corporate defendant, which the law considers to be a citizen of State A and State B, in state court, may the defendant remove the case to federal court under...more
The Sixth Circuit became the third court of appeals to reject the “alternative citizenship” theory of diversity under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). In Roberts v. Mars Petcare US, Inc., a putative class of Tennessee...more
In a recent decision in In re Paulsboro Derailment Cases, the Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a case brought by plaintiffs who alleged that they had been exposed to airborne chemicals following a train derailment....more
In most countries, it is uncontroversial that a court sitting at the situs of an arbitration has jurisdiction to adjudicate a petition to confirm or vacate or modify an award issued in that arbitration. In the United States...more
The Southern District of Illinois recently confirmed that traditional diversity jurisdiction and jurisdiction under the Class Act Fairness Act (CAFA) provide two separate means of obtaining federal jurisdiction over class...more
Addressing an issue of first impression, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Graiser v. Visionworks of America, Inc., recently upheld a defendant’s second attempt at removing a class action to federal court under the Class...more
In an unusual display of speedy discretion, federal District Judge Sheri Polster Chappell wasted no time in dismissing the complaint on a public works payment bond filed by Advance Industrial Coating, LLC in Advance Indus....more
The US Supreme Court recently held that under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a defendant need not provide proof of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal to federal court. Only a plausible allegation is...more
Just two weeks after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a CAFA-based remand order where the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the...more
Days before the Supreme Court’s decision addressing the requirements for CAFA notices of removal in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Third Circuit addressed the evidentiary requirements for surviving a...more
Last week, the United States Supreme Court held that a notice of removal from state court to federal court requires only pleading good faith allegations that the amount in controversy exceeds a jurisdictional threshold. The...more
In a previous blog, we explained that the Supreme Court was considering whether a defendant merely has to allege jurisdictional facts or provide evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case....more
The US Supreme Court ruled last Monday that class action defendants need not provide evidentiary submissions in support of their attempts to remove a case from state to federal court. Rather, they need only include in their...more