Summary
This District Court order adopts a Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendation granting the plaintiff’s motion to remand an employment dispute back to state court. The court addresses the defendant’s objections regarding the voluntary-involuntary rule and statutory waiver under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), concluding that the plaintiff did not waive his argument and that the dismissal of a non-diverse defendant was not a voluntary act. Consequently, the court exercises its discretion to excuse the timeliness of the plaintiff’s procedural argument and orders remand to the Oregon Circuit Court.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether plaintiff waived the voluntary‑involuntary removal rule by not raising it within the 30‑day period after removal.
- Whether the dismissal of the non‑diverse defendant constitutes a voluntary act by plaintiff that triggers the voluntary‑involuntary rule, requiring remand.
Holdings
- The court held that plaintiff did not waive the voluntary‑involuntary rule; the district court may excuse the untimeliness and consider the merits.
- The court held that the dismissal was not a voluntary act by plaintiff; therefore the voluntary‑involuntary rule requires remand.
Key quotations
“The voluntary‑involuntary rule “requires that a suit remain in state court unless a ‘voluntary’ act of the plaintiff brings about a change that renders the case removable.”” (null)
“The purpose of the 30‑day limit is “to resolve the choice of forum at the early stages of litigation, and to prevent the shuffling of cases between state and federal courts after the first thirty days.”” (null)
Factual background
Timothy Schroeder sued Amazon.com Services LLC in Oregon state court. The defendant removed the action to federal court under diversity jurisdiction. The state court dismissed a non‑diverse defendant, and the plaintiff sought reversal of that dismissal. The parties disputed whether the voluntary‑involuntary removal rule was waived and whether the dismissal constituted a voluntary act by the plaintiff.
Procedural history
Defendant removed the case to federal court based on diversity. Plaintiff filed a motion to remand. Magistrate Judge Russo recommended granting the motion. The district court initially declined, then after de novo review adopted the magistrate's recommendation and granted the motion.
Remand instructions
Remand to the Circuit Court of Oregon, Fourth Judicial District.