Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

Larry Lay v. Burley Stabilization Corporati

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided February 12, 2009No. 07-6419Unpublished

1Concurring in the judgmentKaren Nelson Moore, Circuit Judge

I concur in the majority’s conclusions that (1) removal of this action to federal court was proper, (2) issue preclusion bars the instant suit because the identical issue of whether plaintiffs’ claims are derivative or direct was litigated and decided in a *757previous suit between the parties, and (3) even if issue preclusion did not apply, the plaintiffs’ claims are derivative under Tennessee law and the plaintiffs have failed to comply with the demand requirement for derivative suits. I write separately to explain my disagreement with the majority on the proper basis for removal of this action…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & ManufacturingSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  3. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MottleySupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  4. Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. v. McVeighSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  5. Beneficial National Bank v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 2003

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