Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Rico v. Flores

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided March 8, 2007No. 05-41719Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRhesa Hawkins Barksdale, Circuit Judge

For this 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) interlocutory appeal from a remand-denial because of improper joinder, I concur in part TV.A of the majority opinion (holding the absence of consent by in-state defendants Flores and Trevino did not render Union Pacific’s removal invalid). In parts IV.B and C, the majority does not decide: whether the failure of the in-state defendants to plead the unlawful-acts rule bars Union Pacific from relying on it; and whether the unlawful-acts rule is preempted by Tex. Civ. PRAC. & Rem.Code § 93.001(a)(1). Although I would answer *245both questions in the negative, my dissent…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State v. ShumakeTexas Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Kelli Smallwood v. Illinois Central Railroad Company Mississippi Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2004
  3. Gerry M. Griggs v. State Farm Lloyds Lark P. BlumCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999
  4. Russell v. Ingersoll-Rand Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Diaz v. WestphalTexas Supreme Court · 1997

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API