Jacqueline D. Henderson v. Washington National

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the fraudulent joinder doctrine does not turn on “the sufficiency of the pleadings” but rather on “whether . . . there is no possibility [the plaintiff] has asserted a colorable claim”
• stating that a removing defendant must show fraudulent joinder “by clear and convincing evidence”
• stating that a removing party must show fraudulent joinder “by clear and convincing evidence”
• finding no fraudulent joinder even though the complaint did not meet the requirements of Rule 9(b)
• declining to reach the question of whether the plaintiff adequately pled state law fraud because “the decision as to the sufficiency of the pleadings is for the state courts”
• reversing the district court’s denial of the motion to remand because there existed a possibility that the plaintiff asserted a colorable claim for tolling under Alabama law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).