Also known as: motion to remand · motion for remand · remand motion · remand motions
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural motion filed in federal district court seeking to return a removed case to the state court from which it was removed. A motion based on any defect other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be made within thirty days after the notice of removal. If the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction at any time before final judgment, the case must be remanded.
Melanie Morris sued Millennium Media in state court on state-law claims. Millennium Media filed a notice of removal on June 1. On July 15 Melanie moved to remand arguing that one codefendant had not consented to removal. The district court denied the motion because the thirty-day period for nonjurisdictional objections had expired.
Melissa Mills sued Monarch Pharmaceuticals in state court. Monarch removed on diversity grounds. After discovery revealed that a nondiverse defendant had been joined, Melissa moved to remand eight months later. The court granted the motion because lack of subject-matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time before final judgment.
Monica Morgan sued Marathon Logistics in state court. Marathon removed on federal-question grounds that proved unfounded. The district court granted Monica's timely motion to remand and ordered Marathon to pay her reasonable attorney fees incurred because of the improper removal.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Michelle Murphy sued Matrix Technologies in state court. Matrix removed asserting federal jurisdiction. The district court granted Michelle's motion to remand for lack of jurisdiction. Matrix attempted to appeal the remand order, but the court of appeals dismissed the appeal as barred by statute.
Michael Miller sued Marathon Logistics in state court. Marathon removed on diversity. Michael later sought to join a nondiverse party. The court permitted the joinder and remanded the action because the new defendant destroyed subject-matter jurisdiction.
Miles Montgomery sued Monarch Pharmaceuticals in state court asserting only state tort claims. Monarch removed claiming federal issues appeared in anticipated defenses. The district court granted Miles's motion to remand because the well-pleaded complaint presented no federal question.
A motion to remand based on any defect other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be filed within thirty days after the notice of removal. Failure to meet this deadline waives the objection.
Supporting sources
Yes. A motion to remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be made at any time before final judgment. The court must remand if jurisdiction is absent.
Supporting sources
Yes. The statute permits the court to require the removing party to pay just costs and actual expenses, including attorney fees, incurred as a result of the removal.
Supporting sources
Generally no. An order remanding a case to state court is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise, with limited exceptions for cases removed under sections 1442 or 1443.
Supporting sources
The court may deny joinder or permit joinder and remand the action to state court if the joinder would destroy subject matter jurisdiction.
Supporting sources
…for new trial filed with the Chancellor Jan. 20, 1956. After the Florida Supreme Court decision the matter was renewed by a motion to remand filed with the Delaware Supreme Court. In a decision of Jan. 14, 1957, that court denied the motion and affirmed its Chancellor in all respects. The Florida decree was held not binding for…