Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2012

Civil Procedure

Removal

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Opinion Analysis: Deferring To (Even More) Limited Relief From Removal, Jill Family May 2012

Opinion Analysis: Deferring To (Even More) Limited Relief From Removal, Jill Family

Jill E. Family

In a unanimous decision on Monday, the Court held that the Department of Justice’s Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) reasonably construed a statute to forbid the imputation of a parent’s U.S. residency and immigration status to a child to compute the child’s eligibility for relief from removal (deportation).  The Court reversed the decision of the Ninth Circuit in Holder v. Gutierrez, consolidated with Holder v. Sawyers.

Go to article

De-Frauding The System: Sham Plaintiffs And The Fraudulent Joinder Doctrine, Matthew C. Monahan May 2012

De-Frauding The System: Sham Plaintiffs And The Fraudulent Joinder Doctrine, Matthew C. Monahan

Michigan Law Review

Playing off the strict requirements of federal diversity jurisdiction, plaintiffs can structure their suits to prevent removal to federal court. A common way to preclude removability is to join a nondiverse party. Although plaintiffs have a great deal of flexibility, they may include only those parties that have a stake in the lawsuit. Put another way, a court will not permit a plaintiff to join a party to a lawsuit when that party is being joined solely to prevent removal. The most useful tool federal courts employ to prevent this form of jurisdictional manipulation is Federal Rule of Civil Procedure …

Go to article

Argument Recap: Imputing Eligibility For Relief From Removal, Jill Family Jan 2012

Argument Recap: Imputing Eligibility For Relief From Removal, Jill Family

Jill E. Family

At oral argument on January 18, the Court questioned the attorneys in Holder v. Gutierrez and Holder v. Sawyers about calculating relief from removal.  At issue in these consolidated cases is whether a parent’s immigration status and residency in the United States may be imputed to a minor child to calculate eligibility for relief from removal.  The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) said no; the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said yes.

Go to article

Argument Preview: Calculating Relief From Removal, Jill Family Jan 2012

Argument Preview: Calculating Relief From Removal, Jill Family

Jill E. Family

Holder v. Gutierrez and Holder v. Sawyers call into question the BIA’s decision to forbid the imputation of a parent’s immigration status and residency in the United States to a minor child for the purpose of calculating eligibility for relief from removal.  Scratching that simple surface reveals a complex history of imputation and relief from removal.

Go to article

Creating Diversity Jurisdiction In Removal Actions Through The Improper Use Of Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 21: Procedural Blackjack Or Judicial Bust, Anthony Andricks Jan 2012

Creating Diversity Jurisdiction In Removal Actions Through The Improper Use Of Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 21: Procedural Blackjack Or Judicial Bust, Anthony Andricks

Cleveland State Law Review

Recently, federal district courts have held that Federal Civil Rule of Procedure 21 bestows upon them the power to sever nondiverse parties or claims to create diversity jurisdiction without first finding that a party or claim is improperly joined. Severance may mean that a plaintiff who brings a state court action against multiple parties, one or more of which is not diverse, runs the risk of a federal court severing the action in a removal analysis, even where the plaintiff has committed no improper joinder of parties. Severance may leave a plaintiff with the need to conduct simultaneous suits--one in …

Go to article

The Timeliness Of Removal And Multiple-Defendant Lawsuits, Paul Lund Dec 2011

The Timeliness Of Removal And Multiple-Defendant Lawsuits, Paul Lund

Paul Lund

Although the procedure for removing cases from state to federal court has existed for nearly 225 years, removal remains one of the most controversial aspects of federal jurisdictional law. Each year, more than 30,000 civil cases are removed from state to federal court, and many of those cases involve more than one defendant. One of the most frequently litigated issues in these cases has involved when the notice of removal must be filed. Prior to a recent amendment, the statute governing removal, 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), required that a notice of removal be filed within thirty days of service on …

Go to article