•  
  •  
 

Authors

Lucas Reed

Abstract

In 2024, the United States had a “jurisdictional dog fight” on its hands; one between a defendant’s right to access federal courts through removal and a plaintiff’s status as “master of the complaint.” At stake was not mere technical procedure but the very balance between state and federal authority. When defendants began removing cases with embedded federal questions to federal court only to have plaintiffs amend their complaints to eliminate federal “hooks,” the resulting legal battle would test the boundaries of precedent and the logic governing forum selection. Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger provided such a test.

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.