Facts
- CBS aired a 60 Minutes segment about unusually large jury verdicts in rural Mississippi, focusing in part on Jefferson County and describing the area as associated with “jackpot justice.”
- The segment discussed Jefferson County jurors in general terms and did not name or otherwise identify any specific juror.
- Plaintiffs Wylanda Gales, Patricia Gamble, Daniel Glass, Dorothy McGee, Jerry Scott, Jr., and Charles Wesley served as jurors in a Jefferson County Circuit Court “Fen Phen” diet-drug case that returned a verdict of about $150 million.
- Plaintiffs alleged the broadcast maliciously portrayed Jefferson County jurors as handing out high-dollar verdicts without a lawful basis and sued for defamation, libel, and slander under Mississippi law.
- Plaintiffs filed suit in Mississippi state court against CBS; Media General Operations, Inc., d/b/a WJTV (a station that aired the segment); and several individuals associated with the broadcast and related reporting, including Mississippi citizens Wyatt Emmerich and Beau Strittman, as well as non-Mississippi individuals (including Don Hewitt and Morley Safer) and John Doe defendants.
- Defendants removed to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, asserting diversity jurisdiction and contending that the Mississippi defendants (Emmerich and Strittman) should be ignored because they were improperly joined.
- Plaintiffs moved to remand for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and also sought to submit additional evidence relevant to jurisdiction.
Issues
- Whether complete diversity existed under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 when plaintiffs and two named defendants (Emmerich and Strittman) were Mississippi citizens, or whether the court could disregard those defendants’ citizenship under the fraudulent-joinder doctrine.
- Whether the removing defendants carried their burden to show there was no reasonable possibility of recovery against the Mississippi defendants under Mississippi law, such that removal was proper.
- Whether the case should be remanded to Mississippi state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Decision
- The court granted plaintiffs’ motion to remand.
- The court held the removing defendants did not meet their heavy burden to establish fraudulent joinder of the Mississippi defendants.
- Because plaintiffs and at least two properly joined defendants were Mississippi citizens, complete diversity was lacking and the federal court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.
- The court’s ruling addressed only removal jurisdiction; it did not resolve the merits of plaintiffs’ defamation-related claims.
- The court considered the parties’ jurisdictional submissions (including plaintiffs’ request to submit additional evidence) as part of deciding the remand motion.
Legal Principles
- A defendant may remove a state-court action only if the case could have been filed originally in federal court; removal statutes are strictly construed, and the removing party bears the burden to prove federal jurisdiction.
- Diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 requires complete diversity of citizenship between all plaintiffs and all properly joined defendants, and an amount in controversy exceeding the statutory threshold.
- Fraudulent joinder is a narrow exception to the complete-diversity requirement; the removing party must show either (a) actual fraud in pleading jurisdictional facts, or (b) no reasonable possibility that the plaintiff can recover against the non-diverse defendant under applicable state law.
- In assessing fraudulent joinder, the court resolves contested facts and close state-law questions in the plaintiff’s favor and may look beyond the pleadings to limited evidence without deciding the ultimate merits.
- If subject-matter jurisdiction is absent at any time, 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) requires remand to state court.
Conclusion
Because plaintiffs and two defendants were Mississippi citizens and defendants failed to show those in-state defendants were fraudulently joined, the district court lacked diversity jurisdiction and remanded the case to Mississippi state court without reaching the merits of the defamation, libel, or slander claims.