Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Eleventh Circuit· 4/5/1999

Snapper, Inc. v. Redan

Citations

  • 171 F.3d 1249
  • 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 6070
  • 1999 WL 184017

How courts have described this case

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

  • applying “ordinary contract principles” but declining to “address the question of which jurisdiction’s law to apply”
  • “Notwithstanding the potential breadth of the term ‘improvident,’ courts limited the scope of the improvident removal basis for remand by anchoring the definition in errors in the removal process.”
  • “Following the obvious intentions of Congress, courts in most contexts had no trouble interpreting the 1988 language ‘defect in removal procedure’ as perpetuating the narrow interpretation that courts had applied to the 1948 version.”
  • “A remand based on a forum selection clause depends on an adjudication of the meaning of the clause, a determination that is external to the removal process.”
  • “We need not decide whether the clause rises to the level of a clear and unequivocal waiver because we do not agree that such a high standard is desirable.”
  • reaching the merits and affirming remand based on forum-selection clause

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Anderson, Barkett, Hill

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

77 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

56 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Snapper, Inc. v. Redan

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.