Legal Opinion

In Re Successor Liability Claims Against Bairnco Corp.

District Court, S.D. West Virginia

Decided November 18, 1993No. 2:93-0789Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

HADEN, Chief Judge.

Pending is the Plaintiffs’ motion to remand. For reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS the Plaintiffs’ motion and REMANDS this action to the Circuit Court of Kanawha County. The Court chooses not to award attorney fees and costs.

The Defendant, Bairnco Corporation, asserts this case was properly removed based on two principal grounds. First, Bairnco claims a state court order severing issues of successor liability results in complete diversity between Bairnco and the Plaintiffs, and thereby permits removal to federal court. Alternatively,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McClellan v. CarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Chrysler Credit Corp. v. Country Chrysler, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
  3. Johnny Wayne Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg CountyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1969
  4. Covington & Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. HagerSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  5. Jane Bartlett Phillips, as of the Estate of Peter Richard Phillips, Deceased v. Unijax, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980

3 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