Hull v. ConvergeOne, Inc.

D. Minnesota

Hull v. ConvergeOne, Inc.

DecidedFebruary 12, 2021

Docket0:20-cv-00984

StatusUnknown

This text of Hull v. ConvergeOne, Inc. (Hull v. ConvergeOne, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hull v. ConvergeOne, Inc., (mnd 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Samuel Hull, Case No. 20-cv-00984 (SRN/KMM)

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

ConvergeOne, Inc.,

Defendant.

Demetria Laparis Dyer and Sonia L. Miller-Van Oort, Sapientia Law Group, PLLC, 120 South 6th Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55402; and Ellie K. Vilendrer, Vilendrer Law, PC, 3800 American Blvd. West, Suite 1500, Minneapolis, MN 55431, for Plaintiff.

Andrew B. Murphy and Raphael Coburn, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, 90 South 7th Street, Suite 2200, Minneapolis, MN 55402, for Defendant.

SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, United States District Judge This matter is before the Court on Defendant ConvergeOne, Inc.’s unopposed Supplemental Response [Doc. No. 57] to this Court’s August 31, 2020 Order to Show Cause [Doc. No. 51]. In its Order to Show Cause, the Court observed that the Defendant removed this case in violation of the forum-defendant rule. At the time of that Order, the Eighth Circuit treated the forum-defendant rule as jurisdictional, and had held that a violation of the rule constitutes a non-waivable jurisdictional defect. Subsequently, the Court granted the parties’ request to stay these proceedings pending the Eighth Circuit’s en banc rehearing of Holbein v. Baxter Chrysler Jeep, Inc., 948 F.3d 931 (8th Cir. 2020), reh’g en banc granted, opinion vacated (Mar. 19, 2020). (Order [Doc. No. 55].) On December 30, 2020, the Eighth Circuit overruled its prior case law, and held that the forum- defendant rule is non-jurisdictional. Holbein v. TAW Enterprises, Inc., 983 F.3d 1049 (8th

Cir. 2020). In light of the Holbein decision, the Court finds that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted in this matter. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The stay of proceedings imposed by this Court’s September 18, 2020 Order [Doc. No. 55] is LIFTED; and 2. Defendant shall respond to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint by

March 5, 2021. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 12, 2021 s/Susan Richard Nelson SUSAN RICHARD NELSON United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Samuel Hull, Case No. 20-cv-00984 (SRN/KMM)

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

ConvergeOne, Inc.,

Defendant.

Demetria Laparis Dyer and Sonia L. Miller-Van Oort, Sapientia Law Group, PLLC, 120 South 6th Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55402; and Ellie K. Vilendrer, Vilendrer Law, PC, 3800 American Blvd. West, Suite 1500, Minneapolis, MN 55431, for Plaintiff.

Andrew B. Murphy and Raphael Coburn, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, 90 South 7th Street, Suite 2200, Minneapolis, MN 55402, for Defendant.

SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, United States District Judge This matter is before the Court on Defendant ConvergeOne, Inc.’s unopposed Supplemental Response [Doc. No. 57] to this Court’s August 31, 2020 Order to Show Cause [Doc. No. 51]. In its Order to Show Cause, the Court observed that the Defendant removed this case in violation of the forum-defendant rule. At the time of that Order, the Eighth Circuit treated the forum-defendant rule as jurisdictional, and had held that a violation of the rule constitutes a non-waivable jurisdictional defect. Subsequently, the Court granted the parties’ request to stay these proceedings pending the Eighth Circuit’s en banc rehearing of Holbein v. Baxter Chrysler Jeep, Inc., 948 F.3d 931 (8th Cir. 2020), reh’g en banc granted, opinion vacated (Mar. 19, 2020). (Order [Doc. No. 55].) On December 30, 2020, the Eighth Circuit overruled its prior case law, and held that the forum- defendant rule is non-jurisdictional. Holbein v. TAW Enterprises, Inc., 983 F.3d 1049 (8th

Cir. 2020). In light of the Holbein decision, the Court finds that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted in this matter. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The stay of proceedings imposed by this Court’s September 18, 2020 Order [Doc. No. 55] is LIFTED; and 2. Defendant shall respond to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint by

March 5, 2021. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 12, 2021 s/Susan Richard Nelson SUSAN RICHARD NELSON United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Hull v. ConvergeOne, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hull-v-convergeone-inc-mnd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack