Braud v. Transport Service Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the issue presented in Braud was “not whether CAFA should apply to suits ‘commenced’ before February 18, 2005, but whether the addition of a new defendant ‘commences’ a new suit”
• explaining that, the issue presented .in Brand was “not whether CAFA should apply to suits ‘commenced’ before February 18, 2005, but whether the addition of a new defendant ‘commences’ a new suit”
• considering what the “caselaw holds” in determining whether new civil action could be “commenced” on a per-party basis under Class Action Fairness Act
• “[W]hen an action is commenced in state court is determined based on the state’s own rules of procedure.”
• “[W]hen an action is commenced in state court is determined based on the state’s own rules of procedure.”
• “Therefore, as to the new defendant, removability is determined as of the date of receipt of service of the amended complaint, not as of the date on which the original suit was filed in state court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).