§Why CasetextPricing

Removal to Federal Court

undefined

34 Cited authorities

  1. Hertz Corp. v. Friend

    559 U.S. 77 (2010)   Cited 4,413 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a corporation's principal place of business is “the place where a corporation's officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation's activities”

  2. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc.

    545 U.S. 546 (2005)   Cited 4,330 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the supplemental jurisdiction statute permits the exercise of diversity jurisdiction over additional plaintiffs who fail to satisfy the minimum amount-in-controversy requirement, as long as the other elements of diversity jurisdiction are present and at least one named plaintiff does satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement

  3. Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Glob. Grp., L.P.

    541 U.S. 567 (2004)   Cited 2,182 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party's post-filing change in citizenship cannot cure a lack of diversity jurisdiction from the lawsuit's outset

  4. Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.

    24 Cal.4th 317 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 3,301 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."

  5. Burns v. Windsor Ins. Co.

    31 F.3d 1092 (11th Cir. 1994)   Cited 2,020 times
    Holding that when the complaint states an amount in controversy below the jurisdictional requirement, the removing defendant must prove "to a legal certainty" that the claim exceeds the required amount in controversy

  6. Morris v. Princess Cruises, Inc.

    236 F.3d 1061 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 1,122 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that joinder of a party is considered fraudulent if "the plaintiff fails to state a cause of action against a resident defendant, and the failure is obvious according to the settled rules of the state." (internal quotation marks, alteration, and citation omitted)

  7. Potter v. Firestone Tire &

    6 Cal.4th 965 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 869 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding outrageous conduct exceeds all bounds of that usually tolerated in a civilized community

  8. McCabe v. General Foods Corp.

    811 F.2d 1336 (9th Cir. 1987)   Cited 938 times
    Holding that fraudulent joinder is established when a plaintiff "fails to state a cause of action against a resident defendant, and the failure is obvious according to the settled rules of the state"

  9. Gibson v. Chrysler Corp.

    261 F.3d 927 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 577 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the value of unnamed class members' claims cannot satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1367

  10. Mary M. v. City of Los Angeles

    54 Cal.3d 202 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 490 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the city could be liable under respondeat superior for a police officer who committed a sexual assault while on duty in California

  11. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 114,655 times   572 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"

  12. Section 157 - Procedures

    28 U.S.C. § 157   Cited 51,901 times   82 Legal Analyses
    Determining the validity, extent, or priority of liens

  13. Section 1441 - Removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1441   Cited 51,292 times   151 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[a]ny civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the ... laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties.”

  14. Section 1446 - Procedure for removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1446   Cited 22,503 times   141 Legal Analyses
    Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim

  15. Section 3294 - When damages recoverable for sake of example and by way of punishment; employer liability for acts of employee; death from homicide

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3294   Cited 2,856 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Stating plaintiff may recover punitive damages "in addition to the actual damages"

  16. Section 12965 - Civil action in name of department on behalf of aggrieved party

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12965   Cited 630 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing the courts with discretionary authority to award attorney's fees and costs to the prevailing party

  17. Section 11008 - Definitions

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 11008   Cited 18 times   3 Legal Analyses

    As used in this chapter, the following definitions shall apply unless the context otherwise requires: (a) "Applicant." Any individual who files a written application or, where an employer or other covered entity does not provide an application form, any individual who otherwise indicates a specific desire to an employer or other covered entity to be considered for employment. Except for recordkeeping purposes, "Applicant" is also an individual who can prove that he or she has been deterred from applying

  18. Rule 3.400 - Definition

    Cal. R. 3.400   Cited 30 times

    (a) Definition A "complex case" is an action that requires exceptional judicial management to avoid placing unnecessary burdens on the court or the litigants and to expedite the case, keep costs reasonable, and promote effective decision making by the court, the parties, and counsel. (b) Factors In deciding whether an action is a complex case under (a), the court must consider, among other things, whether the action is likely to involve: (1) Numerous pretrial motions raising difficult or novel legal