Legal Opinion
Jarvis v. FHP of Utah, Inc.
District Court, D. Utah
Decided January 19, 1995No. 94-C-0898-SPublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
SAM, District Judge.
The court has before it plaintiffs Motion to Remand 1 and defendant FHP of Utah, Inc.’s (“FHP”) Motion to Dismiss.
The court first considers plaintiffs Motion to Remand. Plaintiff asserts that because not all of the defendants joined in the notice of removal or filed any pleadings establishing their unambiguous consent, the removal was fatally defective requiring remand. The facts reflect that plaintiff filed her complaint on November 3, 1993 in Utah state court. Plaintiff amended her complaint to add a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (Title VII) on October 10,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- In Re MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Joan Elena Lanier v. The American Board of Endodontics and the American Association of Endodontists, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
- Lena Mae Harris v. Edward Hyman CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Mason v. International Business MacHines, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1982
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- McShares, Inc. v. BarryDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1997
- Henderson v. HolmesDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1996
- Spillers v. TillmanDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 1997
- Williams v. Howard UniversityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1997
- Tresco, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co.District Court, D. New Mexico · 2010
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.