City of Cleveland v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that “Harper stands for the proposition that a party seeking to remove a case to federal court need do no more than obtain the consent of his fellow defendants and make a timely representation of that consent to the court[ ]”
• defendant “could have accomplished a valid removal merely by representing to the Court that its co-defendants consented to the removal”
• “[A] corporation cannot appear in federal court pro se, but must be represented by counsel.”
• “The general impetus for applying § 1447(e) is for the trial court to use its discretion and determine if allowing joinder would be fair and equitable.” (internal quotations omitted)
• “At the outset, the City’s contest of the validity of the written consents fails because, under Sixth Circuit authority [Harper], defendants can express consent to removal without making any filing in writing, but merely by joining in opposition to a motion to remand.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).