Leslie Pinciaro Dudley v. Eli Lilly and Comany

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a CAFA defendant has “access to its own employment records” and can provide information derived from those records “without conceding liability or being unduly burdened”
• noting that a CAFA defendant has “access to its own 26 employment records” and can provide information derived from those records “without conceding liability or being unduly burdened”
• noting that a CAFA defendant has “access to its own employment records” and can provide information derived from those 6 records “without conceding liability or being unduly burdened”
• holding “that jurisdictional facts are evaluated as they stand at the time of removal”
• explaining that “a CAFA defendant who fails to meet his burden for removal at the early stages of litigation may still have recourse to the federal courts later, after a fuller record has been developed in discovery in the state court”
• explaining “pertinent question is what is in controversy in the case, not how much the plaintiffs are ultimately likely to recover”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).