Moltner v. Starbucks Coffee Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he 30-day period did not begin to run until the defendant received the first document from which all of the facts giving rise to removability were evident.”
• “[T]he 30-day period did not begin to run until the defendant received the first document from which all of the facts giving rise to remova-bility were evident.”
• “[A] bright line rule is preferable to the approach [plaintiff] advocates. Requiring a defendant to read the complaint and guess the amount of damages that the plaintiff seeks will create uncertainty....”
• “[T]he 30-day period did not begin to run until the defendant received the first document from which all of the facts giving rise to removability were evident.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).