Reeder v. The Kroger Co.; The Coca-Cola Company; and John Does 1-10

Reeder · United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi · January 6, 2026 · No. 3:25-CV-98-DMB-JMV

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi denied Amy Catherine Reeder’s motion to remand her negligence action to state court. The court held that Kroger’s timely, separately filed notice of removal constituted written consent to Coca-Cola’s removal and satisfied the rule of unanimity.

Court
United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi
Writing for the Court
Debra M. Brown
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi
Decision date
January 6, 2026
Docket number
3:25-CV-98-DMB-JMV
Procedural posture
Plaintiff moved to remand a removed diversity action to Mississippi state court, arguing that Coca-Cola's removal was defective because Kroger did not join or consent to it.
Standard of review
The party seeking removal bears the burden of showing that federal jurisdiction exists and that removal was proper.
Precedential value
unknown
Parties
Amy Catherine Reeder v. The Kroger Co., The Coca-Cola Company, John Does 1-10
Disposition
other

Topics

civil proceduresubject matter jurisdictionnegligencepersonal injury

Practice areas

civil procedureremoval and remanddiversity jurisdictionpersonal injury negligence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a codefendant's separate, timely filed notice of removal constitutes written consent to another codefendant's removal for purposes of the federal rule of unanimity.
  2. Whether the case should be remanded because Kroger did not sign or separately file a joinder or consent to Coca-Cola's notice of removal in the same case.

Holdings

  1. A codefendant satisfies the rule of unanimity by filing its own separate notice of removal within thirty days after service, because that filing is a timely, written, and express indication of consent to removal.
  2. Remand was not warranted because Kroger timely consented to Coca-Cola's removal by filing its separate notice of removal within thirty days of service.

Key quotations

To satisfy the rule of unanimity, a codefendant can join in a removal petition either by signing the original petition for removal or by timely filing written consent to the removal. (at 3)
Consent to removal “simply requires that there be ‘some timely filed written indication from each served defendant, or from some person or entity purporting to formally act on its behalf in this respect and to have the authority to do so, that it has actually consented to such action.’” (at 3)
Kroger’s separate removal notice satisfies the rule of unanimity in this case because Kroger complied with the strict requirements of consent—it was timely, written, and filed in this district by Kroger itself. (at 6)

Factual background

Reeder alleged that she tripped and fell over a display of Coca-Cola products in a Kroger store in Oxford, Mississippi. She sued Kroger, Coca-Cola, and fictitious defendants for negligence in Mississippi state court. Both Kroger and Coca-Cola were served on February 26, 2025, and each filed a separate notice of removal within thirty days based on diversity jurisdiction.

Procedural history

Reeder filed a negligence action in the Circuit Court of Lafayette County, Mississippi. Coca-Cola removed the case to the Northern District of Mississippi on March 27, 2025, and Kroger filed a separate notice removing the same action the following day. Kroger later agreed to consolidate and withdraw its separate removal, and the related case was closed. Reeder then moved to remand, which the court denied.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…