Commonwealth v. Pretti, R.

How courts have described this case

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

• “A defendant is fraudulently joined when ‘plaintiff fails to state 21 a cause of action against a resident defendant, and the failure is obvious according to the settled rules of the state.’”
• “Plaintiffs sought leave to amend the complaint ... The 3 district court properly denied the motion because the proposed amendment sought to rejoin 4 diversity-destroying defendants under the analysis required by 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e).”
• “Plaintiffs sought leave to amend the complaint .... The 21 district court properly denied the motion because the proposed amendment sought to rejoin 22 diversity-destroying defendants under the analysis required by 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e).”
• “Plaintiffs sought leave to amend the complaint ... The 3 district court properly denied the motion because the proposed amendment sought to rejoin 4 diversity-destroying defendants under the analysis required by 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e).”
• “Plaintiffs sought leave to amend the complaint. . . The district court properly denied 20 the motion because the proposed amendment sought to rejoin diversity-destroying defendants 21 under the analysis required by 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e).”
• “Plaintiffs sought leave to amend the complaint . . . The 25 district court properly denied the motion because the proposed amendment sought to rejoin 26 diversity-destroying defendants under the analysis required by 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).