Samuel Bray’s The Mischief Rule reconceptualizes and revitalizes that venerable canon of statutory interpretation. Bray’s new approach to the mischief rule offers a textual solution to an ongoing civil procedure puzzle—forum defendants and “snap removal.” The forum-defendant rule provides that a diversity case is not removable from state to federal court when a properly joined and served defendant is a citizen of the forum state. Snap removal occurs whena defendant removes before the forum defendant has been properly served, “snapping” the case into federal court. Three courts of appeals and a majority of district courts have endorsed this practice, concluding that it is consistent with the unambiguous text of 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2) and doe...
The article presents information on the use of anti-messiness arguments by the U.S. Court to bring t...
This Note examines the current disarray of federal forum-selection clause jurisprudence. Theoretical...
In litigation, “haves” and “have-nots” battle over what procedures should govern. Yet, much greater ...
Samuel Bray’s The Mischief Rule reconceptualizes and revitalizes that venerable canon of statutory i...
The “Removal Jurisdiction Clarification Act” is a narrowly tailored legislative proposal designed to...
The “Removal Jurisdiction Clarification Act” is a narrowly tailored legislative proposal designed to...
Snap removal employs “a literalist approach” to the statute governing the procedural mechanism for r...
The mischief rule tells an interpreter to read a statute in light of the “mischief” or “evil”—the pr...
Section 1441(b) of the removal statute prohibits removal of a diversity case if a defendant is a cit...
This Note will examine all sides of the district court split and ultimately argue in favor of the pl...
This Article will first review the intersection of federal jurisdiction and litigation strategy by e...
The ubiquitous and somewhat careless use of the term “jurisdictional” by courts has spawned confusio...
The word “corruptly” presents significant interpretation problems to courts construing the word in s...
Playing off the strict requirements of federal diversity jurisdiction, plaintiffs can structure thei...
This article is the first academic defense of pre-service removal in diversity cases by forum-state ...
The article presents information on the use of anti-messiness arguments by the U.S. Court to bring t...
This Note examines the current disarray of federal forum-selection clause jurisprudence. Theoretical...
In litigation, “haves” and “have-nots” battle over what procedures should govern. Yet, much greater ...
Samuel Bray’s The Mischief Rule reconceptualizes and revitalizes that venerable canon of statutory i...
The “Removal Jurisdiction Clarification Act” is a narrowly tailored legislative proposal designed to...
The “Removal Jurisdiction Clarification Act” is a narrowly tailored legislative proposal designed to...
Snap removal employs “a literalist approach” to the statute governing the procedural mechanism for r...
The mischief rule tells an interpreter to read a statute in light of the “mischief” or “evil”—the pr...
Section 1441(b) of the removal statute prohibits removal of a diversity case if a defendant is a cit...
This Note will examine all sides of the district court split and ultimately argue in favor of the pl...
This Article will first review the intersection of federal jurisdiction and litigation strategy by e...
The ubiquitous and somewhat careless use of the term “jurisdictional” by courts has spawned confusio...
The word “corruptly” presents significant interpretation problems to courts construing the word in s...
Playing off the strict requirements of federal diversity jurisdiction, plaintiffs can structure thei...
This article is the first academic defense of pre-service removal in diversity cases by forum-state ...
The article presents information on the use of anti-messiness arguments by the U.S. Court to bring t...
This Note examines the current disarray of federal forum-selection clause jurisprudence. Theoretical...
In litigation, “haves” and “have-nots” battle over what procedures should govern. Yet, much greater ...