In Ewalt v. GateHouse Media Ohio Holdings, No. 25-4015 (6th Cir. May 22, 2026), the Sixth Circuit agrees with the defendant that the district court ought not have remanded this CAFA (Class Action Fairness Act) case after denying class certification, but holds that the remand could no longer be challenged after the 30-day window forContinue reading “While Noting That the District Court Legally Erred in Its CAFA Remand, the Sixth Circuit Nevertheless Holds That the Defendant Forfeited Its Chance to Timely Challenge the Order”
Tag Archives: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
District Court May Not Look Behind a State Court’s Application of Its Own Procedural Law on Motion to Remand Under 28 U.S.C. § 1446, Holds Fifth Circuit
In Turner v. GoAuto Insurance, No. 22-30103 (5th Cir. May 2, 2022), the Fifth Circuit holds that a district court properly remanded a class action to state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1446 when it accepted an amended complaint, filed two days before the removal petition, as the operative complaint that limited the class solelyContinue reading “District Court May Not Look Behind a State Court’s Application of Its Own Procedural Law on Motion to Remand Under 28 U.S.C. § 1446, Holds Fifth Circuit”
Because Defendants Never Received Written Notice from Plaintiff That Disclosed Basis for Federal Jurisdiction, Third Circuit Holds That 30-Day Clock for Removal Never Triggered Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441
In McLaren v. The UPS Store Inc., No. 22-1379 (3d Cir. Apr. 25, 2022), the Third Circuit vacates an order remanding a case to state court on timing grounds, holding that the district court erred as a matter of law in finding that the 30-day clock for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1446 started runningContinue reading “Because Defendants Never Received Written Notice from Plaintiff That Disclosed Basis for Federal Jurisdiction, Third Circuit Holds That 30-Day Clock for Removal Never Triggered Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 