Lopez v. BNSF Railway Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding defendants had no constructive notice of remaining defendants before filing for removal, after they had searched the Superior Court case docket and found no proof of service on file
• removing defendant exercised reasonable diligence in attempt to determine whether co-defendant had been served, and although co-defendant had been served and proof of service was filed on same day as removal notice, co-defendant’s consent to removal was not required
• removal permitted where removing defendant did not first obtain 5 consent of properly served co-defendants but had exercised “reasonable diligence” and 6 nevertheless failed to determine co-defendants had been properly served

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Antonio Abrego Abrego v. The Dow Chemical Co Shell Oil Company, D/B/A Shell Chemical Company, and Shell Agricultural Chemical Company
  Ninth Circuit· 2006-04-04· cited 1,756×
• Prize Frize, Inc. v. Matrix (U.S.) Inc.
  Ninth Circuit· 1999-02-12· cited 214×
• Hewitt v. City of Stanton
  Ninth Circuit· 1986-07-28· cited 97×
• Community Bldg. Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.
  Ninth Circuit· 1925-11-09· cited 32×
• Milstead Supply Co. v. Casualty Insurance
  W.D. Texas· 1992-07-31· cited 29×
• Pianovski v. Laurel Motors, Inc.
  N.D. Illinois· 1996-05-07· cited 9×