Legal Opinion

Groesbeck Investments, Inc. v. Smith

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided September 30, 2002No. 02-70058PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND AND ORDER REMANDING THIS ACTION TO THE MA-COMB COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

ROSEN, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

This matter is presently before the Court on Plaintiff Groesbeck Nine Investment, Inc.’s Motion to Remand. In this Motion, Plaintiff contends that Defendant United States did not timely remove the case to this Court in compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) which requires that a notice of removal be filed within thirty days after the defendant receives a copy of the initial pleading setting forth the claim for relief upon which the action…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. SheetsSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Jefferson County v. AckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. McCraw v. LyonsDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1994
  5. Schwartz v. FHP International Corp.District Court, D. Arizona · 1996

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. May v. Johnson Controls, Inc.District Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2006
  2. State ex rel. Slatery v. Tenn. Valley Auth.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2018
  3. GRIEVANCE ADM'R, ATTY. GRIEVANCE COM'N v. FiegerDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2005
  4. Zeigler v. BeersDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2005
  5. Maguire v. Genesee County SheriffDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2009

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