Thomas Albarado’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We have consistently held that “‘when section 1447(c) speaks of any defect in removal procedure, it includes within its reach the bringing of an action not within the court’s removal jurisdiction but that could have been brought originally in that court.’ ” Hopkins [v. Dolphin Titan Intern., Inc.], 976 F.2d [924] at 926 [(5th Cir.1992) ] (quoting Baris v. Sulpicio Lines, Inc., 932 F.2d 1540, 1544-45 (5th Cir.1991) (internal quotations omitted)).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Meeks v. Swift Transportation, Inc.

2. “Thus, to the extent that our implicit holding in In re Excel can be read as inconsistent with our prior holdings in Johnson, Hopkins, and Williams , our earlier decisions control.... Thus, remand based upon § 1445(a)’s statutory restriction against removal is a procedural defect under § 1447(c), and the district court’s remand order based thereupon is not subject to appellate review.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Meeks v. Swift Transportation, Inc.

3. “A motion to remand the case on the basis of any defect other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be made within 30 days after the filing of the notice of removal under section 1446(a). If at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 425 F. App'x 287 - Big Country Vein Relief, L.P. v. Directory Assistants, Inc.