Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 830 FSUPP 184 - Mermelstein v. Maki

Mermelstein v. Maki’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
May 2005
most recently cited

1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447

Relies on New York State Association for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Hugh L. Carey, Individually and as Governor of the State of New York · Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. of New York v. Republic of Palau · Moore v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc. · 658 F. Supp. 1093 - Soler v. G & U, INC. · 813 F. Supp. 267 - Figueroa v. Kim

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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A motion to remand the case on the basis of any defect in removal procedure 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. An order remanding the case may require payment of just costs and any actual expenses, including attorney fees, incurred as the result of removal. A certified copy of the order of remand shall be mailed to the clerk to the clerk of the State court. The State court may thereupon proceed with such case.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the statute as amended makes no reference at all to the state of mind or intent of the party removing the action, instead focusing strictly on the mere absence of subject matter jurisdiction. The amendment also added to the statute an explicit reference to attorneys’ fees as part of the costs that may be awarded.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.