Who are the decision makers at INTERPOL's CCF?
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 332: Listen and Learn -- Removal (Civ Pro)
What if the CCF denies my request for the removal of my Red Notice?
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 163: Listen and Learn -- Removal (Civ Pro)
CF on Cyber: An Update on the Florida Security of Communications Act (FSCA)
NGE On Demand: The (Dilatory) Forum Defendant Rule and Snap Removal with Nick Graber
On Monday, June 16, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, a case about the extent to which federal contractors can remove lawsuits to federal court under the federal...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
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
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
Ruling suggests a new means of stemming the flood tide of state-court Securities Act claims that followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s Cyan decision in 2018. But uncertainty lingers as to whether post-IPO public companies can...more
A defendant by any other name does not smell as sweet when it comes to removing class actions from state court to federal court, even under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”). Congress passed CAFA to address...more
On May 28, 2019, a divided Supreme Court held in a 5–4 opinion that third-party counterclaim defendants cannot remove putative class actions to federal court under the general federal removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441, or the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court Limits Parties Entitled to Seek Removal of Class Action Claims Under CAFA - In a recent decision addressing federal court jurisdiction, the U.S. Supreme Court held that third-party counterclaim...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued two 5-4 decisions in as many months regarding class procedures. Lamp Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 587 U. S. ____ (2019) was favorable to corporate defendants by limiting the availability of class...more
From the class action defense perspective, companies and counsel alike are almost always looking for an angle to move a state-filed putative class action to the more rigorous environment of the federal courts. Congress...more
In Home Depot U. S. A., Inc. v. Jackson, No. 17-1471 (May 28, 2019), the Supreme Court of the United States addressed whether third-party counterclaim defendants in class actions have authority under the general removal...more
In a 5-4 decision written by Justice Clarence Thomas, and in which Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan joined, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that third-party defendants in state court actions cannot remove...more
To the surprise of many observers (including us), the Supreme Court held last week in Home Depot USA Inc. v. George Jackson that a third-party defendant could not remove class action claims – under either the general removal...more
On May 28, 2019, the Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision authored by Justice Thomas that a third-party counterclaim defendant was not permitted to remove class action claims against it under the general removal statute, 28...more
On May 28, the Supreme Court decided Home Depot U.S.A. v. Jackson, 17-1471 (2019), ruling 5–4 that third-party counterclaim defendants may not remove class actions from state to federal court. The decision, besides keeping in...more
It has long been established that a state-court plaintiff who is the subject of a counterclaim cannot remove the case to federal court. ...more
On May 28, 2019, Justice Clarence Thomas — joined by unlikely allies Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan — wrote the 5-4 majority opinion holding that third-party counterclaim defendants in class actions do not...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Defendants can remove lawsuits filed in state courts to federal courts if they meet the statutory requirements for removal under either 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) or the Class Action Fairness Act. In Home Depot U....more
The Lede - As Congress appreciated when it enacted the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), large, multistate class actions are better suited for federal courts, not state ones. Following that logic, the Supreme Court...more
The Supreme Court yesterday rejected a counterclaim defendant’s attempt to remove a would-be class action to federal court, holding that even where that defendant, Home Depot, was not an original plaintiff, there was no right...more
The Supreme Court recently clarified that third-party counterclaim defendants — parties who were not defendants in the original action, but were brought in as third-party defendants by virtue of the original defendant’s...more
On May 28, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson, No. 17-1471, holding that neither the general federal removal statute nor the removal provision in the Class Action Fairness...more
The U.S. Supreme Court held yesterday that a third-party defendant could not remove a class action to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) because the term “defendant” as used in CAFA refers only to the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court in Home Depot U. S. A., Inc. v. Jackson, No. 17-1471, 2019 WL 2257158 (U.S. May 28, 2019) held that a third-party defendant first named in a counterclaim cannot remove cases under either the general...more
On February 25, 2019, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute of Legal Reform (the “ILR”) published a report entitled “Containing the Contagion: Proposals to Reform the Broken Securities Class Action System” (the “Report”)....more