Legal Opinion
Mullins v. Hinkle
District Court, S.D. West Virginia
Decided February 5, 1997No. Civil Action 5:96-0634PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
GOODWIN, District Judge.
On September 25, 1996, Magistrate Judge Mary Feinberg filed Findings and a Recommendation that the Court grant the plaintiffs Motion'to Remand for failure of all' defendants to join in the petition for removal. The removing defendants (all-defendants except the defendant Hinkle) objected to the Findings and Recommendation on October 9, 1996. These defendants assert that the claims stated against them in the complaint are “separate and independent” from the claim stated against the defendant Hinkle and that they are therefore excepted under 28 U.S.C. §…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Baldwin County Welcome Center v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- American Fire & Casualty Co. v. FinnSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Baltimore Steamship Co. v. PhillipsSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- IUE AFL-CIO Pension Fund v. HerrmannCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Allen v. Monsanto Co.District Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2005
- Berman v. Congressional Towers Ltd. Partnership-Section IDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2004
- A.D. Powers v. MillerNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1999
- Mayo v. Christian Hosp. Northeast-NorthwestDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1997
- Proa v. NRT Mid Atlantic, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.