Opinion ID: 374943
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure of Unions to Join in Removal Petition.

Text: 32 In the original state court action, Fristoe named as defendants Reynolds Metals Company and unnamed officers of Reynolds and of the unions later joined as defendants. The removal petition was filed only on behalf of Reynolds. Fristoe contends removal was improper because all of the defendants did not join in the removal petition. We disagree. 33 Defendants . . . are to be treated collectively; and, as a general rule, all defendants who may properly join in the removal petition must join. 1A Moore's Federal Practice and Procedure, 447, P 0.168(3.-2), cited by P.P. Farmers' Elevator Co. v. Farmers Elevator Mutual Insurance Co., 395 F.2d 546, 547 (7th Cir. 1968). 34 First, since the unions were not named as defendants in the state court action their joinder would not have been proper. Consequently, they were not required to join in the removal petition. 35 Second, even if Fristoe's objection can be read as including the failure of the unidentified officers of Reynolds and the unions, as well as the Doe defendants, to join in the removal petition, their joinder was unnecessary. 36 The unnamed officers did not have to join in the petition according to Perpetual Building and Loan Ass'n. v. Series Directors of Equitable Building & Loan Ass'n, Series No. 52, 217 F.2d 1 (4th Cir. 1954). In that case, all defendants except Series Directors of the company joined in the removal petition. The court held the removal petition was not defeated by the non-joinder of the Series Directors since there is nothing in the record to show the existence of any such juristic person or persons. Id. at 6. The unnamed officers could similarly be disregarded. 37 Finally, the unknown defendants sued as Does need not be joined in a removal petition. Ronson Art Metal Works, Inc. v. Hilton Lite Corp., 111 F.Supp. 691 (N.D.Cal.1953). See also Grigg v. Southern Pacific Co., 246 F.2d 613, 619-20 (9th Cir. 1957). 38 Removal to federal court was proper.