Upward view of downtown Chicago blue skies

DRI is the Largest Bar Association of Civil Defense Attorneys and In-House Counsel

Seminars & Webinars

Announcements

DRI Proposes Model Legislation to Remedy High Court Decision in Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson

  • Published August 10, 2020

DRI Proposes Model Legislation to Remedy High Court Decision in Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson

Seeks Consistency in Removal of Class Actions to Federal Courts

CHICAGO(August 10, 2020)—DRI’s Center for Law and Public Policy has proposed model legislation that would remedy the Supreme Court’s decision in Home Depot U.S.A, Inc. v. Jackson.

For over 240 years, Congress has allowed citizens of different states to litigate in federal court and for equally as long has permitted defendants, in cases exceeding the jurisdictional minimum, to remove such cases from state court to federal court. The underlying premise has always been the same: certain conditions being met, an out-of-state defendant facing a claim in the plaintiff’s home court should have the ability to have the dispute heard in federal court. 

For more than 60 years before Congress enacted the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), the Supreme Court and lower federal courts had held that persons who were made defendants to a counterclaim were stuck in state court without the right of removal. The reasoning was that only the original defendants were entitled to the right of removal.

In CAFA, Congress hoped to promote more uniformity and predictability in class adjudication by funneling class litigation to federal courts operating under the same set of procedural rules, rather than the procedural rules of 50 different states. CAFA’s removal provisions do not limit removal to the original defendants, but instead allow “any defendant” to remove a case containing a claim meeting its requirements.

But last year, in Home Depot U.S.A, Inc. v. Jackson, the Supreme Court by a 5-4 majority again precluded a party – in that instance a third-party defendant who had nothing to do with the choice of the original forum – from removing a class action against it which met the requirements of CAFA.

“We have had a fair process of removal that worked for over 240 years,” said Mike Pennington, one of the DRI authors of the model legislation. “It surely was the intent of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 that that process was to continue. This legislation would restore the right of removal to all defendants.”

DRI suggests a legislative remedy, similar to one already in place in other removal statutes. This simple amendment to CAFA’s removal provision would solve the problem:

28 USC 1453

 (b) In General.—

A class action may be removed to a district court of the United States in accordance with section 1446 (except that the 1-year limitation under section 1446(c)(1) shall not apply), without regard to whether any party is a citizen of the State in which the action is brought.  Such class action may be removed by any party against whom any claim, crossclaim, counterclaim, or third-party claim is asserted that purports to assert claims on a class action basis, without the consent of any other party….

Michael Pennington, Chair of DRI’s Class Action Task Force is available for interview or expert comment through the contact information listed above.

###

 

About DRI – The Voice of the Defense Bar

DRI, with nearly 18,000 members, has tirelessly advocated for the valuable role attorneys play in representing businesses and individuals in civil matters. DRI is committed to enhancing the skills and professionalism of defense attorneys and anticipating and addressing issues germane to the civil justice system, including preserving the civil jury and promoting the appreciation of the role of the defense bar. 

 

DRI Proposes Model Legislation to Remedy High Court Decision in Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson

  • Published August 10, 2020

DRI Proposes Model Legislation to Remedy High Court Decision in Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson

Seeks Consistency in Removal of Class Actions to Federal Courts

CHICAGO(August 10, 2020)—DRI’s Center for Law and Public Policy has proposed model legislation that would remedy the Supreme Court’s decision in Home Depot U.S.A, Inc. v. Jackson.

For over 240 years, Congress has allowed citizens of different states to litigate in federal court and for equally as long has permitted defendants, in cases exceeding the jurisdictional minimum, to remove such cases from state court to federal court. The underlying premise has always been the same: certain conditions being met, an out-of-state defendant facing a claim in the plaintiff’s home court should have the ability to have the dispute heard in federal court. 

For more than 60 years before Congress enacted the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), the Supreme Court and lower federal courts had held that persons who were made defendants to a counterclaim were stuck in state court without the right of removal. The reasoning was that only the original defendants were entitled to the right of removal.

In CAFA, Congress hoped to promote more uniformity and predictability in class adjudication by funneling class litigation to federal courts operating under the same set of procedural rules, rather than the procedural rules of 50 different states. CAFA’s removal provisions do not limit removal to the original defendants, but instead allow “any defendant” to remove a case containing a claim meeting its requirements.

But last year, in Home Depot U.S.A, Inc. v. Jackson, the Supreme Court by a 5-4 majority again precluded a party – in that instance a third-party defendant who had nothing to do with the choice of the original forum – from removing a class action against it which met the requirements of CAFA.

“We have had a fair process of removal that worked for over 240 years,” said Mike Pennington, one of the DRI authors of the model legislation. “It surely was the intent of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 that that process was to continue. This legislation would restore the right of removal to all defendants.”

DRI suggests a legislative remedy, similar to one already in place in other removal statutes. This simple amendment to CAFA’s removal provision would solve the problem:

28 USC 1453

 (b) In General.—

A class action may be removed to a district court of the United States in accordance with section 1446 (except that the 1-year limitation under section 1446(c)(1) shall not apply), without regard to whether any party is a citizen of the State in which the action is brought.  Such class action may be removed by any party against whom any claim, crossclaim, counterclaim, or third-party claim is asserted that purports to assert claims on a class action basis, without the consent of any other party….

Michael Pennington, Chair of DRI’s Class Action Task Force is available for interview or expert comment through the contact information listed above.

###

 

About DRI – The Voice of the Defense Bar

DRI, with nearly 18,000 members, has tirelessly advocated for the valuable role attorneys play in representing businesses and individuals in civil matters. DRI is committed to enhancing the skills and professionalism of defense attorneys and anticipating and addressing issues germane to the civil justice system, including preserving the civil jury and promoting the appreciation of the role of the defense bar. 

 

DRI Helps Build Your Book of Business

DRI is the premier global membership organization for legal professionals dedicated to protecting the interests of businesses and individuals in civil litigation. As a member of DRI, you gain exclusive access to a wealth of resources, educational opportunities, and tools. Our mission is to empower attorneys committed to delivering top-notch, fair, and outstanding legal services to their clients and corporate entities. Join DRI to elevate your practice and stay at the forefront of excellence in the legal profession.

Learn More

Drive Your Business with Referrals

Two hands shaking icon diversity

47% of DRI members have given or received a referral in the last 2 years.

Of Those Receiving Referrals

79% Have received 2 or more referrals in the last 2 years

51% Were more than $50K

Of Those Giving Referrals

80% Have given 2 or more referrals in the last 2 years

52% Were more than $50K

Based on a 2024 survey of active DRI members.

Explore the Benefits of DRI Membership

Attendees networking at a conference

Seminars + Networking Opportunities

Attend an in-person event to grow your book of business, sharpen your professional skills, and earn valuable CLE. Members receive the lowest pricing!

Woman working from home with laptop and taking notes

Webinars

Take advantage of webinars on trending topics from leaders in the field. Plus, DRI Members receive 9 free webinars in 2024. Earn up to 8 CLE (value $1,350)!

Laptop opened with headphones and glasses on table

On-Demand Library

Earn CLE credit anytime and anywhere through DRI's On-Demand Library, with over 150 available programs.

Man researching and taking notes

Find a Lawyer

Search for lawyers in your area by practice type and committee — and have other lawyers find you.

legalpoint

Publications

DRI members can access our archives and submit articles for consideration, allowing them to share their professional expertise with colleagues across the globe.

Corinthian Columns Courthouse

Courtroom Insight (DRI Expert Database)

Searching for an expert witness? Browse from over 460,000 profiles as you research your case.

Meet Our Premier Corporate Partner

LawyerGuard Logo

DRI would like to recognize and thank our Premier Corporate Partner for their support in helping to shape the future of civil litigation.

Get Involved by Joining a Committee

Group of people brainstorming ideas

Joining any of DRI’s 30 committees is a great way to engage with the community, enhance your career, and grow your network. A number of the committees also have “specialized litigation groups” (SLGs) that focus on specific areas of practice. FREE for DRI Members.

Explore our Committees

DRI Helps Members Succeed

Douglas Burrell

"DRI helped me expand my network to obtain business referrals from other attorneys. If you put in the effort, DRI will certainly work for you."

Douglas Burrell, Chartwell Law

Catherine Leatherwood

"Starting my DRI involvement as a Young Lawyer has provided me with all these benefits and so many more. It has truly enhanced my career and my development as a lawyer."

Catherine Ava Leatherwood, Rogers Townsend LLC

Erik W. Snapp

"DRI is more than just a group that provides high-quality programming -- it’s a community of friends and soon-to-be friends who work together and learn from each other."

Erik W. Snapp, Eli Lilly and Company

Are You Ready to Grow Your Career?

Get Started!