Class actions; removal
An action by a state attorney general under a state law is not removable to federal court as a class action.
“Restraint is particularly appropriate in light of the Supreme Court’s directive that removal statues should be ‘strictly construed,’ Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28, 32 (2002), and the sovereignty concerns that arise when a case brought by a state in its own courts is removed to federal court. As the Supreme Court has noted, “considerations of comity make us reluctant to snatch cases which a State has brought from the courts of that State, unless some clear rule demands it.” Franchise Tax Bd. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 21 n.22 (1983). See also CVS Pharmacy, 646 F.3d at 178 (‘While it is true that West Virginia voluntarily entered into its own courts to enforce its laws, it did not voluntarily consent to removal of its case to a federal court, and a federal court should be most reluctant to compel such removal, reserving its constitutional supremacy only for when removal serves an overriding federal interest.’).”
“The district court correctly determined that this case
is not a class action or mass action under CAFA.”
11-8017 LG Display Co., Ltd., v. Madigan
Petition for Permission to Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Illinois, Dow, J., Tinder, J.