Robert H. Harris v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company Kenneth L. Brown

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant BMW was “not obligated to supply information”—in that case, business records identifying a “representative valuation” of the vehicles at issue—“which [plaintiff] had omitted [from the complaint]”
• holding that defendant BMW was “not obligated to supply information”—in that case, business records identifying a “representative valuation” of the vehicles at issue—“which [plaintiff] had omitted [from the complaint]”
• holding that where an initial pleading does not make clear on its face the facts supporting removal, the second thirty-day period in § 1446(b) has not yet begun to run
• holding that “notice of removability under § 1446(b) is determined through examination of the four corners of the applicable pleadings, not through subjective knowledge or a duty to make further inquiry”
• finding that plaintiff’s abandonment of claims against one defendant created diversity of citizenship between parties and thus allowed for removal under § 1446(b)(3)
• holding action is not removable 8 unless complaint “affirmatively reveal[s] information to trigger removal based on 9 diversity jurisdiction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).