Removal – Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog

Seventh Circuit Rejects Extension of Fraudulent Joinder Doctrine, as an Exception to Diversity Jurisdiction, to Examination of Whether the Plaintiff’s Legal Team Intends to Pursue Claims Against the Non-Diverse Defendants

In In re Abbott Laboratories, No. 25-2327 (7th Cir. July 28, 2026), the Seventh Circuit reverses an order denying a remand of a products liability case to state court, holding that the district court exceeded the bounds of the fraudulent joinder doctrine by considering whether the plaintiffs’ lawyers “demonstrated sufficient intent to pursue claims against”Continue reading “Seventh Circuit Rejects Extension of Fraudulent Joinder Doctrine, as an Exception to Diversity Jurisdiction, to Examination of Whether the Plaintiff’s Legal Team Intends to Pursue Claims Against the Non-Diverse Defendants”

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”

In The City of New York v. Exxon Mobil Corp., No. 24-1568 (2d Cir. Oct. 3, 2025), a 2-1 panel holds that Exxon could be sanctioned under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) for pressing the same grounds for removal that eight U.S. Courts of Appeals had rejected after the original removal. The dissent would hold thatContinue reading “Split Second Circuit Panel Affirms Attorney Fee Sanction Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) Under “Unusual Circumstances,” Where Defendant Continued to Resist a Motion to Remand on Grounds That Federal Courts Widely Rejected After the Original Removal”

In Black v. Mantei & Associates, Ltd.. No. 24-1439 (4th Cir. July 30, 2025), the Fourth Circuit holds that the fee-shifting provision applicable to removal petitions, 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), does not authorize – let alone mandate – attorney’s fees for defending an award of attorney’s fees on appeal, rejecting decisions in the Seventh CircuitContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Splits with Seventh Circuit in Holding That a Court May Not Award Appellate Attorney’s Fees Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c)”

In Abraham Watkins Nichols Agosto Aziz & Stogner v. Festeryga, No. 23-20337 (5th Cir. May 16, 2025) (en banc), the Fifth Circuit unanimously overrules a 45-year-old circuit precedent and holds that an order remanding a removed case based on the defendant’s alleged waiver by participation in a state-court case falls within the court’s appellate jurisdictionContinue reading “En Banc Fifth Circuit Holds That Waiver-Based Remand Orders Are Appealable Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447, Overruling the Circuit’s Long-Standing Contrary Authority”

In Wilson v. Hearos, LLC, No. 23-12550 (11th Cir. Feb. 18, 2025), the Eleventh Circuit holds that a plaintiff who failed to challenge a non-party’s removal of an action to federal court under the general removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), within the 30 days provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) waived his objection. TheContinue reading “Eleventh Circuit Splits with Fifth in Holding That Non-Party Removal of a Case to Federal Court Is a Waivable Procedural Defect Subject to the 30-Day Limit Under § 1447(c)”

In City of Martinsville, Va. v. Express Scripts, Inc., No. 24-1912 (4th Cir. Feb. 10, 2025), a 2-1 panel holds that because the defendant filed its appeal before the district court physically mailed a remand order to state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1447, the order had no legal effect. The panel judges differ overContinue reading “Fourth Circuit Panel Holds 2-1 That Defendants Won the Race to the Courthouse Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447, Filing a Notice of Appeal That Stayed the District Court’s Authority to Remand a Removed Case Back to State Court”

In New Orleans City v. Aspect Energy, LLC, No. 24-30199 (5th Cir. Jan. 23, 2025), the Fifth Circuit holds that the unexplained failure of the City of New Orleans to add the State of Louisiana as a party to its complaint meant that the federal court had diversity jurisdiction over the removed case. “Appellant, NewContinue reading “City’s Unexplained Failure to Name State as a Party Prevents Remand of Removed Case to State Court Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447, Holds Fifth Circuit”

In Monsanto Co. v. General Electric Co., No. 24-1230 (8th Cir. Jan. 22, 2025), an Eighth Circuit panel splits over when the 30 days begin to run for a removal petition to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) when the parties use a waiver-of-service procedure. The panel majority holds that the time runs fromContinue reading “Time to Remove Under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) Triggered by Date Acknowledged by the Parties on the Waiver of Service Rather Than When the Waiver Is Signed or Filed in Court, Holds Split Eighth Circuit Panel”

In Casola v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 23-55403 (9th Cir. Apr. 10, 2024), the Ninth Circuit rejects a California corporation’s attempt to avoid the forum-defendant rule by filing removal petitions in federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) even before the cases were docketed in California state court. The forum-defendant rule is an exception to removalContinue reading “Ninth Circuit Nixes “Super Snap Removals” to Circumvent the Forum Defendant Rule, 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2)”