An Entity of Type: unit of work, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Home Depot U. S. A., Inc. v. Jackson, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case which determined that a third-party defendant to a counterclaim submitted in a state-court civil action cannot remove their case to federal court. The Court explained, in a 5–4 decision, that although a third-party counterclaim defendant is a "defendant to a claim," removal can only be performed by the defendant to a "civil action." And this holds true even when the counterclaim is in the form of a class action. The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 permits removal by "any defendant to a class action" but this does not extend removal rights to a third-party counterclaim defendant because they are not a defendant to the original case.

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • Home Depot U. S. A., Inc. v. Jackson, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case which determined that a third-party defendant to a counterclaim submitted in a state-court civil action cannot remove their case to federal court. The Court explained, in a 5–4 decision, that although a third-party counterclaim defendant is a "defendant to a claim," removal can only be performed by the defendant to a "civil action." And this holds true even when the counterclaim is in the form of a class action. The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 permits removal by "any defendant to a class action" but this does not extend removal rights to a third-party counterclaim defendant because they are not a defendant to the original case. Although the decision technically only governs what court hears—rather than the actual outcome of—a particular case, the ruling has been described as being "pro-consumer" because of its potentially broader implications. The practical effect of the Court's holding is to make it "more difficult for class action defendants to transfer their cases from plaintiff-friendly state courts to more business-friendly federal courts." As such, while the case theoretically only deals with venue, it may in practice benefit consumers with plausible claims against corporations. Justice Samuel Alito, in the dissenting opinion, argued that a plaintiff who brings a lawsuit in their "own state's courts might ... enjoy ... a home court advantage against outsiders." To that end, he explained, Congress opened the "federal courts to certain disputes between citizens of different states." While plaintiffs could take this option by simply filing their case in federal court, defendants did not have control over where a case was filed. So defendants were given the right of removal, which could be invoked to transfer a case from state to federal court. By denying removal here, Justice Alito argued, the majority had denied the defendant a "neutral forum." (en)
dbo:soundRecording
dbo:thumbnail
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 65187629 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 27036 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1030401520 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:arguedate
  • 0001-01-15 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:argueyear
  • 2019 (xsd:integer)
dbp:decidedate
  • 0001-05-28 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear
  • 2019 (xsd:integer)
dbp:description
dbp:dissent
  • Alito (en)
dbp:docket
  • 17 (xsd:integer)
dbp:filename
  • Home Depot U. S. A., Inc. v. Jackson oral arguments.mp3 (en)
dbp:fullname
  • Home Depot U. S. A., Inc., Petitioner v. George W. Jackson (en)
dbp:holding
  • Federal law does not authorize the removal of a case to federal court by a third-party counterclaim defendant, even where the counterclaim is a class action. (en)
dbp:joindissent
  • Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh (en)
dbp:joinmajority
  • Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan (en)
dbp:lawsapplied
  • 28 (xsd:integer)
dbp:litigants
  • Home Depot U. S. A., Inc. v. Jackson (en)
dbp:majority
  • Thomas (en)
dbp:opinion
dbp:oralargument
dbp:parallelcitations
  • 139 (xsd:integer)
dbp:pos
  • right (en)
dbp:title
  • Oral arguments (en)
dbp:uspage
  • ___ (en)
dbp:usvol
  • 587 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dcterms:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Home Depot U. S. A., Inc. v. Jackson, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case which determined that a third-party defendant to a counterclaim submitted in a state-court civil action cannot remove their case to federal court. The Court explained, in a 5–4 decision, that although a third-party counterclaim defendant is a "defendant to a claim," removal can only be performed by the defendant to a "civil action." And this holds true even when the counterclaim is in the form of a class action. The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 permits removal by "any defendant to a class action" but this does not extend removal rights to a third-party counterclaim defendant because they are not a defendant to the original case. (en)
rdfs:label
  • Home Depot U. S. A., Inc. v. Jackson (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:depiction
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
foaf:name
  • Home Depot U. S. A., Inc., Petitioner v. George W. Jackson (en)
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License