Episode 102
Opinion Summary: Royal Canin U. S. A. v. Wullschleger | Date Decided: 1/15/25 | Case No. 23-677
Case Info: Royal Canin U. S. A. v. Wullschleger | Date Decided: 1/15/25 | Case No. 23-677
Link to Docket: Here.
Questions Presented:
- Whether such a post-removal amendment of the complaint defeats federal-question subject-matter jurisdiction.
- Whether such a post-removal amendment of the complaint precludes a district court from exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiffs remaining state-law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1367.
Holding: When a plaintiff amends her complaint to delete the federal-law claims that enabled removal to federal court, leaving only state-law claims behind, the federal court loses supplemental jurisdiction over the state claims, and the case must be remanded to state court.
Result: Affirmed.
Voting Breakdown: Justice Kagan delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
Link to Opinion: Here.
Oral Advocates:
- For petitioners: Katherine B. Wellington, Boston, Mass.
- For respondents: Ashley C. Keller, Chicago, Ill.
Website Link to Oral Argument: Here.
Apple Podcast Link to Oral Argument: Here.
