Gerald T. Martin, et Ux. v. Franklin Capital Corporation et al. (546 U.S. 132)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided December 7, 2005 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 546 U.S. 132 · 126 S. Ct. 704
- Decided
- December 7, 2005
- Term
- October Term 2005
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Roberts
- Issue area
- Attorneys
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
CHIEF Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court. A civil case commenced in state court may, as a general matter, be removed by the defendant to federal district court, if the case could have been brought there originally. 28 U. S. C. § 1441 (2000 ed. and Supp. II). If it appears that the federal court lacks jurisdiction, however, “the case shall be remanded.” § 1447(c). An order remanding a removed case to state court “may require payment of just costs and any actual expenses, including attorney fees, incurred as a result of the removal.” Ibid. Although § 1447(c) expressly permits an award of attorney’s fees, it provides little guidance on when such fees are warranted. We granted certio-rari to determine the proper standard for awarding attorney’s fees when remanding a case to state court. HH Petitioners Gerald and Juana Martin filed a class-action lawsuit in New Mexico state court against respondents Franklin Capital Corporation and Century-National Insurance Company (collectively, Franklin). Franklin removed the case to Federal District Court on the basis of diversity of citizenship. See §.§ 1332,1441 (2000 ed. and Supp. II). In its removal notice, Franklin acknowledged that the amount in controversy was not clear from the face of the complaint— no reason it should be, since the complaint had been filed in state court — but argued that this requirement for federal…
Excerpt of a 15,878-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.