About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


1 1 (June 17, 2025)

handle is hein.crs/civiprod0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Congressional ______ SResearch Service Civil Procedure at the Supreme Court: Selected Cases from the October 2024 Term June 17, 2025 During the October 2024 term, the Supreme Court considered multiple cases focused on procedural issues. Among them were cases raising questions related to jurisdiction over suits removed from state court to federal court, eligibility for awards of attorney's fees, the effects of voluntary dismissal of a case, and the standard that applies to a request to vacate a judgment for the purpose of filing an amended complaint. Each of the cases involved the application of federal statutes or rules of procedure. Congress has the power to amend the laws and procedural rules that govern proceedings in federal courts. Thus, the cases may be of interest to Congress because Congress could amend the specific provisions at issue in these cases or could look to the rulings as guidance on how the Court might interpret related legislation in the future. This Legal Sidebar provides an overview of four civil procedure cases from the Supreme Court's October 2024 term, listed chronologically by date of decision, then briefly discusses related considerations for Congress. Royal Canin U.S.A. v. Wullschleger Royal Canin US.A. v. Wullschleger, decided January 15, 2025, concerned the scope of federal court jurisdiction over cases removed from state court to federal court. As a general matter, a plaintiff filing a civil lawsuit is master of the complaint and can choose what claims to pursue and which court to file in, but the defendant may be able to change where the case proceeds. One choice the plaintiff may be able to make when filing is whether to sue in state or federal court. If the plaintiff files suit in state court, the defendant may sometimes remove the case to federal court and proceed there instead. Several federal statutes allow for removal to federal court in different situations. The most commonly invoked is the general federal removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441. Subject to certain exceptions, that statute allows for removal of any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction-that is, any case filed in a state court that could have been filed originally in federal court. The general removal statute does not apply to all state court suits because state courts can hear most civil cases, including many types of cases that could proceed in federal court, but federal courts have jurisdiction to decide only certain limited categories of cases. Once a federal district court has jurisdiction over some claims in a case, 28 U.S.C. § 1367 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB11324 CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress