Isaiah Evans v. Walter Industries

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that evidence of interviewing numerous potential class members residing in the forum state presented by plaintiffs was inadequate to qualify for a CAFA exclusion
• holding that once the removing party has established the appropriateness of CAFA jurisdiction, the objecting party bears the burden to prove the applicability of any exception to CAFA’s grant of jurisdiction
• holding that once the removing party has established the appropriateness of CAFA jurisdiction, the objecting party bears the burden to prove the applicability of any exception to CAFA's grant of jurisdiction
• concluding that plaintiffs did not seek “significant relief” where allegations against defendant supported right to relief for only a small portion of the class
• concluding that a class defined to include “property owners, lessees, [and] licensees of properties” who came in contact with defendants’ waste substances was not necessarily limited to Alabama citizens
• holding that “significant defendant” is one who has significant role in conduct alleged in complaint relative to other defendants, and one against whom the relief sought is significant portion of relief sought by entire class

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).