News & Analysis as of

Removal Diversity Jurisdiction Jurisdiction

Benesch

Ninth Circuit Shuts Down “Super” Snap Removals, Leaves Question of “Non-Super” Snap Removals (AKA Pre-Service Removals) Open for...

Benesch on

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

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP

The Road Less Traveled - A Case for the Consideration of Hidden Constitutional Claims in Evaluating Removal and the Possible...

After being retained to represent a client who has been served with a state court complaint, most defense attorneys can predict many of the questions the client will ask in the initial call. One such question is whether the...more

Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP

NGE On Demand: The (Dilatory) Forum Defendant Rule and Snap Removal with Nick Graber

NGE Insurance Policyholder associate Nick Graber details the “forum defendant” rule, which prevents lawsuits from being removed from state to federal court where a defendant who is a resident of the forum (a “forum...more

Lathrop GPM

Eighth Circuit En Banc Upholds Diversity Jurisdiction Despite Improper Removal

Lathrop GPM on

On December 30, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed its long-standing precedent and joined other circuits in holding that the forum-defendant rule is not jurisdictional. State diversity...more

K&L Gates LLP

No Snap Decisions Here: Federal District Courts Remain Divided Over Pre-Service “Snap Removal” Even as Appellate Courts Endorse...

K&L Gates LLP on

A. THE ISSUE: CAN AN IN-STATE DEFENDANT REMOVE TO FEDERAL COURT BASED ON DIVERSITY JURISDICTION BEFORE RECEIVING SERVICE OF PROCESS, A MOVE KNOWN AS “SNAP REMOVAL”? A Washington State plaintiff sues Illinois defendants in...more

Troutman Pepper

Winning the Removal Race: District Courts Put Limits on 'Snap Removal'

Troutman Pepper on

In two recent decisions — Brown v. Teva Pharmaceuticals and Doe v. Valley Forge Military Academy & College — courts in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania put limits on the use of so-called “snap removal,” a strategy...more

Butler Snow LLP

An Update on Snap Removal

Butler Snow LLP on

A defendant can utilize 28 U.S.C. § 1441 to remove a state court case to federal court where complete diversity of citizenship exists. But the statute includes restrictions that limit a defendant’s ability to remove a case to...more

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard,...

How Much is Enough to Remove? Considerations that Shouldn't be "Smuggled into the Judicial Inquiry."

A plaintiff filed a class-action complaint in state court alleging a potential liability of $2.9 million to the class, plus fees and punitive damages. The defendant conducted its own calculation and determined that the amount...more

Winstead PC

Court Discusses Diversity of Citizenship Jurisdiction Where A Trustee Removed The Case

Winstead PC on

In Thunder Patch II, LLC v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., plaintiffs filed suit against a trustee in state court seeking a declaration regarding the enforceability of a mineral lease, and the trustee removed the case to federal...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Seventh Circuit Considers Diversity Jurisdiction in Trust Dispute

Foley & Lardner LLP on

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

BakerHostetler

Sixth Circuit Narrowly Construes CAFA’s Local Controversy Exception

BakerHostetler on

Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) in 2005 to address a series of well-documented abuses of the class action process. Among the protections of the act were provisions enabling class action defendants to...more

Balch & Bingham LLP

Eleventh Circuit Holds that District Courts Retain Original Jurisdiction Over State Law CAFA Claims Even After Class Claims Are...

Balch & Bingham LLP on

In a case of first impression for the Court, the Eleventh Circuit recently addressed whether federal district courts retain original subject matter jurisdiction over state law claims included in a class action filed pursuant...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

The Case for a Unified Approach to Corporate and LLC Citizenship

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Imagine opening your email one morning to find a copy of a complaint and summons just received by your out-of-state corporate client. The caption shows a familiar North Carolina company as the lone plaintiff, and a cursory...more

Beveridge & Diamond PC

High Court Finds Plausible Showing of Amount in Controversy Sufficient to Remove Action

Beveridge & Diamond PC on

In a decision that may make it somewhat easier for defendants to remove putative class actions from state to federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that defendants in such cases do not need to offer evidence in their...more

Zelle  LLP

Don’t Mess With Texas Adjusters In Hail Damage Claims

Zelle LLP on

Texas hail claim policyholder lawyers, like many plaintiffs’ lawyers, clearly prefer to be in state court rather than federal court. To accomplish this and prevent the defendant insurer from properly removing the lawsuit to...more

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Removal Pleading Standard

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

Carlton Fields

Eleventh Circuit Affirms CAFA-Based Remand Order

Carlton Fields on

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

Carlton Fields

Third Circuit Weighs In On Burden of Proof and Evidentiary Standards Applicable to Cases Removed Under CAFA

Carlton Fields on

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

Polsinelli

Supreme Court Establishes New Standards: Removal Pleadings Now Less Burdensome For State Court Suits

Polsinelli on

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

Burr & Forman

Who Needs Proof? Not The Notice of Removal.

Burr & Forman on

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

Proskauer - Corporate Defense and Disputes

Supreme Court Clarifies the Standard Governing Removal of Class Action Cases to Federal Court

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

K&L Gates LLP

Removing a Barrier: The Supreme Court Holds That, Under CAFA, Notices of Removal Need Not Include Evidence Supporting the Amount...

K&L Gates LLP on

On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens that a class action defendant need only allege the requisite amount of controversy “plausibly” in the notice of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

No Proof Necessary: SCOTUS Rules Defendant’s Notice Of Removal Under CAFA Need Not Include Evidence of The Amount In Controversy

On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split in holding that a defendant need not supply evidence of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act...more

Carlton Fields

Supreme Court Confirms That A Notice Of Removal Requires Only A “Plausible Allegation” That The Amount In Controversy Has Been Met

Carlton Fields on

The Supreme Court has held that a notice of removal requires only a “plausible allegation that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold,” and confirmed that a notice of removal need not include evidence...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Removing Class Actions to Federal Court

Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, No. 13-719, a case involving the procedural requirements for removing a class action from state to federal court under the Class...more

29 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide