Hospice Insights Podcast - Hospice Audit Updates: Hospices Fare Well in Federal Court
Suluki Secrets: Behind the Scenes of Reasonable Investigations — FCRA Focus Podcast
Court: United States District Court for the Central District of California - In this action, plaintiff Sondra Scott alleges asbestos exposure from her personal use of various talcum powder products including, but not limited...more
The forum defendant rule normally bars removing a state case to federal court when there is a forum defendant, even if the parties are otherwise diverse. A rarely-used method is the exception to this rule. Using a procedure...more
Federal courts can adjudicate state-law claims arising out of the same facts as federal-law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, but what happens if, after removal, the plaintiff amends her complaint to remove the federal questions...more
Snap removal is a rare but useful procedural device to remove an action from state to federal court under the diversity jurisdiction rules, even when the plaintiff’s complaint names an in-state defendant as a party....more
On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States in Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc., et al. v. Wullschleger et al., upheld the Eighth Circuit’s decision, holding that when a plaintiff amends their complaint and deletes...more
Even practitioners well-accustomed to federal practice often overlook the critical rule regarding the deadline for removal when a defendant has been served through a statutory agent, an agent appointed to receive process by...more
The removal of a state court action to federal court is often conceptualized in the context of 28 U.S.C. § 1441, where, but for the plaintiff’s choice of venue, the matter could have been filed in federal court pursuant to...more
The law is the law, but the procedural rules and local customs and practices in federal court differ in many ways from Michigan’s state court system. Originally published in the Michigan Bar Journal Of Interest - January...more