Caterpillar, Inc. v. Lewis

Caterpillar, Inc. v. Lewis - Civil Procedure 10/30 Removal...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Civil Procedure 10/30 Removal Caterpillar, Inc. v. Lewis, U.S. Supreme Court, 1996 Facts : Lewis (KY) suffered injuries while operating a bulldozer. Asserting state-law claims , he sued Caterpillar (DE corp. with principal place of business in Ill.) and Whayne Supply Company (KY/KY). Several months later, Liberty Mutual (MA/MA) joined as plaintiff to recoup workers comp. benefits paid to Lewis on behalf of his employer. Lewis settled with Whayne less than a year after filing his complaint. Caterpillar then filed a notice of removal in U.S. District Court, claiming diversity. Lewis moved to remand the case back to state court because Liberty Mutual had not yet settled its claim against Whayne. Without addressing this argument, the District Court denied Lewis motion to remand. Later Liberty Mutual and Whayne settled. There was a jury trial and Caterpillar won. Court : (1) the District Court, in denying Lewis attempt to remand, wrongly treated Whayne as dropped from the case prior to removal. (2) 6Whayne as dropped from the case prior to removal....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/10/2011 for the course LAW 503 taught by Professor Hoffheimer during the Fall '08 term at Ole Miss.

Page1 / 2

Caterpillar, Inc. v. Lewis - Civil Procedure 10/30 Removal...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online