Corona-Contreras v. Gruel

A district court may not, sua sponte, remand an action to state court for procedural defects in the removal, but may do so only on a timely remand motion.  Procedural defects in a removal, such as untimeliness—i.e., more than 30 days after service if the complaint discloses that it is removable or more than a year after the complaint is filed—are waived unless the plaintiff files a timely motion for remand.  The district court lacks authority to remand a removed case sua sponte for a procedural defect.  Because the district court exceeded its authority in remanding this case for a procedural defect even though plaintiff failed to move for remand, the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to review and reverse the remand order under 28 USC 1447(d).

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Montgomery, J., sitting by designation); May 26, 2017; 2017 WL 2294764

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s