|
||||
|
||||
Interlocutory Review of Orders Denying Remand MotionsRory M. RyanBaylor University - Law School Luke MeierBaylor University - Law School William Jeremy CounsellerBaylor University - Law School August 31, 2011 Baylor Law Review, Vol. 63, No. 3, 2011 Abstract: When can an appellate court review a district court’s denial of a remand motion before a final judgment? Surprisingly little has been written on this topic, especially compared to how much has been written on the review of a district court’s grant of a remand motion. But recent developments in the Fifth Circuit, including a case in which we participated as amicus, provide a fine case study for addressing these questions. Our goal here is to guide judges and lawyers in answering the opening question. Our short answer is that a remand denial is not inherently different than the typical interlocutory ruling, and therefore a party must follow the ordinary appellate methods prescribed by Congress: either await final judgment or obtain certification under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Mandamus review is generally unavailable because the petitioner has an adequate remedy by appeal. Neither the time, hassle and expense of enduring trial, nor the possibility that the appeal might ultimately prove unsuccessful, render the appellate remedy inadequate.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 47 Keywords: remand, mandamus, removal, final judgment, adequate remedy, appeal, Rory Ryan, Luke Meier, Jeremy Counseller Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: August 31, 2011 ; Last revised: January 26, 2012Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo6 in 1.281 seconds