July 13, 2020

Volume X, Number 195

July 10, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Don’t Remand Me: Court Denies Motion to Remand FCRA Case

Cavanaugh v. Equifax Info. Servs., 2018 U.S. Dist LEXIS 169911 (D. Me. Oct. 2, 2018) is a recent and good reminder of the difficulties plaintiffs face when attempting to remand Fair Credit Report Act (FCRA) cases based on additional state law claims.

The plaintiff originally filed his complaint seeking damages under FCRA in the Cumberland County Superior Court.  Defendant Equifax removed the matter to federal district court, and plaintiff filed a motion to remand.  Plaintiff argued- rather weakly- that he “intended” to include state law causes of action in his complaint, and that the case should therefore be returned to state court.

The district court made two critical, and correct, observations.  First, under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), “any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed . . .” Because the federal district court had original jurisdiction over the FCRA claim, it could be removed.  Second, under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(c), as long as the federal district court had supplemental jurisdiction over any additional state law claims, the entire lawsuit could be removed.  A district court need not sever and remand a state law cause of action unless the district court lacks supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367.  In this case, the district court found that, because any potential state law claim “form[s] part of the same case or controversy” as the FCRA claim, the district court retained jurisdiction over the entire case, and denied the motion to remand.

Copyright © 2020 Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume VIII, Number 278


About this Author

John Hawk Attorney Womble Bond Litigator

John Hawk is a skilled litigator with over a decade of experience serving the complex and diverse litigation needs of Fortune 500 companies and smaller lenders. He focuses his practice on consumer finance, lender liability and insurance.

Specifically, John routinely defends cases brought pursuant to ERISA, FCRA, TCPA and FDCPA. His clients include life and disability insurance companies, banks and other lenders, and mortgage servicers.

John’s experience includes frequent appearances in state and federal courts, including the South Carolina Court of Appeals and the Supreme...