Opinion ID: 221968
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Discretion to Remand and the Effect of Waiver of Right to Remove

Text: The issue of whether a party's previous failure to argue fraudulent joinder and timely remove the case on the basis of diversity jurisdiction affects the district court's authority to remand state law claims after the case has been properly removed to district court is res nova in this Court and our sister courts of appeals. In Buchner v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, a case examining whether remand was proper after a party had waived its right to removal on the basis of federal question jurisdiction, we stated that the ability of a party to remove a case and the ability of a court to remand a case that has been properly removed by a party are distinct concepts not necessarily subject to the same rules. 981 F.2d 816, 818 (5th Cir.1993). Unquestionably, a party may implicitly waive its right to remove a case by failing timely to file a notice of removal. Id. Likewise, a party may implicitly waive its right to contest the removal of a case on procedural grounds by failing timely to move for remand. Id. Once the district court has assumed jurisdiction over a properly removed case, however, whether a party had previously waived its right to a federal forum at some earlier point in the litigation by failing to timely remove is irrelevant to the determination of whether the district court can or should remand the action. See id. The district court's authority to remand the case to state court depends on the nature of the district court's jurisdiction over the claims that comprise the case at the time of the remand. Id.; Adair, 587 F.3d at 240. When the federal court has original subject-matter jurisdiction over a claim, that jurisdiction is `not discretionary with the district court' and `can neither be conferred nor destroyed by the parties' waiver or agreement.' Adair, 587 F.3d at 241 (quoting Buchner, 981 F.2d at 820-21). If the district court only has supplemental jurisdiction over the claim, Congress has granted authority to the district court to adjudicate the claim or remand the claim based on the court's discretion. Id. (citing 28 U.S.C §§ 1367(c), 1441(c)). Thus, we must examine whether the district court had diversity jurisdiction over the state law claims at the time of the remand.