In Re: Fmc Corporation Packaging Systems Division, in No. 99-5220

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that District Courts may not sua sponte remand cases for reasons other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction
• holding that remand order was reviewable because the district court exceeded its authority under § 1447(c) by sua sponte remanding an action within thirty days of removal based on a procedural defect
• concluding “the District Court 3 removal, Bally’s “snap removal” would be proper, see Encompass Insurance Company v. Stone Mansion Restaurant Incorporated, 902 F.3d 147, 152 (3d Cir. 2018
• holding “that the District court exceeded its authority . . . [by] remand[ing] these actions, sua sponte, based on what it identified as procedural defects in the petition for removal”
• holding a district court exceeds its authority under 28 U.S.C. §1447(c) when it “raises sua sponte a procedural defect in the petition for removal and remands the case on that basis”
• explaining that a district court cannot remand an action sua sponte for untimeliness

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).