Brandchaft v. E.F. Hutton & Co., Inc., 87-6528
| Decision Date | 01 February 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-6528,87-6528 |
| Parties | Bernard BRANDCHAFT, Dr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. E.F. HUTTON & COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Before TANG, FLETCHER and POOLE, Circuit Judges.
On July 2, 1987, this case was removed to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. At the time of removal, the complaint contained allegations against fictitious "Doe" defendants. On September 29, 1987, the district court struck the "Doe" allegations pursuant to C.D.Cal.R. 3.7.2.1 and dismissed the complaint as to defendant E.F. Hutton & Company, Inc. Plaintiff appealed the district court's order on October 22, 1987.
On January 11, 1988, plaintiff moved to remand this case to state court pursuant to Bryant v. Ford Motor Co., 832 F.2d 1080, 1083 n. 6 (9th Cir.1987) (en banc). The motion to remand is denied. Bryant does not require remand in cases where "Doe" defendants were stricken by the district court prior to the November 6, 1987 decision in Bryant.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lancaster Community Hosp. v. Antelope Valley Hosp. Dist.
... ... ANTELOPE VALLEY MEDICAL GROUP, INC., Defendant-Appellee, ... Antelope Valley ... See Community Communications Co. v. City of Boulder, 455 U.S. 40, 102 S.Ct. 835, ... ...
-
ALASKA CARGO TRANSPORT v. Alaska RR Corp.
... ... Supp. 1216 ... ALASKA CARGO TRANSPORT, INC., Plaintiff, ... ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION, et ... Jackson, 682 F.2d at 1350; M-K Engineering Co. v. Alaska Power Authority, 662 F.Supp. 303 ... ...
-
Boone v. Redevelopment Agency of City of San Jose
... ... Fort Vancouver Plywood Co. v. United States, 747 F.2d 547, 552 (9th ... to regulate." Mercy-Peninsula Ambulance, Inc. v. County of San Mateo, 791 F.2d 755, 757 (9th ... ...
-
Kruso v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp.
...Bryant, this court created two exceptions to the rule that the presence of Doe defendants precludes removal. In Brandchaft v. E.F. Hutton & Co., 841 F.2d 886 (9th Cir.1988), we decided that "Bryant does not require remand in cases where 'Doe' defendants were stricken by the district court p......
-
Table of Cases
...F.2d 810 (11th Cir. 1990), 109 Boomer v. AT&T, 309 F.3d 404 (7th Cir. 2002), 165, 166 Boone v. Redevelopment Agency of City of San Jose, 841 F.2d 886 (9th Cir. 1988), 119 Borough of Ellwood City v. FERC, 583 F.2d 642 (3d Cir. 1978), 164 Borough of Lansdale v. PP&L, Inc., 503 F. Supp. 2d 730......