Legal Opinion
Woodard-Hall v. STP Nuclear Operating Company DO NOT DOCKET. CASE HAS BEEN REMANDED.
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided July 20, 2020No. 3:20-cv-00037Unknown
1Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT July 20, 2020 David J. Bradley, Clerk FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION ══════════ No. 3:20-cv-00037 ══════════ MAUDESTER WOODARD-HALL, PLAINTIFF, v. STP NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, DEFENDANT. ══════════════════════════════════════════ MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ══════════════════════════════════════════ JEFFREY VINCENT BROWN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. Before the court is Maudester Woodard-Hall’s motion to remand.1 Having considered the parties’ arguments and the applicable law, and for the reasons discussed below, the court grants…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Beneficial National Bank v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Howery v. Allstate Ins CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.