David Johnson, et al. v. Boone County, Missouri, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri denied Plaintiffs’ motion to remand an action removed from Missouri state court. The court held that alleged deficiencies in the removal record and the timing or form of codefendants’ consents did not warrant remand, and that defendants’ failure to act in state court did not constitute abandonment of the right to a federal forum. The court lifted the discovery stay and directed Plaintiffs to respond to a pending motion to dismiss and the parties to submit a proposed scheduling order.

Holdings

1. The alleged failure to attach the entirety of the state-court record did not require remand because the deficiency was technical, did not demonstrate false representations or coercion concerning consent, and could be cured without remand.
2. The later-filed consents did not invalidate removal or require remand because all codefendants ultimately consented, and the Eighth Circuit had not specified a fixed time limit for consent under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2)(C).
3. A defendant's failure to take action in state court did not constitute abandonment of the right to remove or consent to removal, and alleged default did not provide a basis for remand.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the notice of removal was procedurally defective because it did not include all process, pleadings, and orders served on the removing defendants.
2. Whether the removal was invalid for lack of unanimity because some codefendants filed consents after the initial removal.
3. Whether codefendants abandoned their right to a federal forum or were unable to consent to removal because they allegedly failed to answer or otherwise defend in state court.
4. Whether alleged state-court defaults provided a basis for remand.

Disposition

remanded