Case Citator › Letherer v. Alger Group, L.L.C.

Letherer v. Alger Group, L.L.C.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Sixth Circuit
Citation
328 F.3d 262
Decided
Confirmed treatments
2
Flagged citations read
41 of 41
Citing cases (total)
41
Treatment dates
2007–2015
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Letherer v. Alger Group, L.L.C. was overruled in part on appellate review of remand orders. Powerex Corp. v. Reliant Energy Services, Inc. held that a remand for lack of jurisdiction is shielded from appellate review even when jurisdiction existed at removal; the Sixth Circuit later identified Letherer as one of the decisions displaced on that point in Blackburn v. Oaktree Capital Management, LLC. Letherer's separate Rule 21 guidance continues to be applied.
More on how this was screened

All 41 flagged citations have been read, and the two adverse treatments are listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

41 later cases cite Letherer v. Alger Group, L.L.C.; 41 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Letherer v. Alger Group, L.L.C.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • Held that a remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is unreviewable even if the case was properly removed, displacing Letherer's rule allowing appellate review when jurisdiction was lost after removal.

    Powerex Corp. v. Reliant Energy Services, Inc. · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    We hold that when a district court remands a properly removed case because it nonetheless lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the remand is covered by § 1447(c) and thus shielded from review by § 1447(d).
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Declined to follow

  • Chose to allow a Rule 41 notice dismissing all claims against one defendant in a multiple defendant action, rejecting the contrary Sixth Circuit approach reaffirmed in Letherer.

    Van Leeuwen v. Bank of America, N.A. · D. Utah · filed

    The Second and Sixth Circuits have historically taken the opposite approach based on a literal reading of the Rule. ... But the Sixth Circuit has not departed from the literal interpretation in Harvey Aluminum of the “action”/“claim” distinction in the Rule; rather, it has repeatedly expressly reaffirmed it. See, e.g., Letherer v. Alger Grp., LLC, 328 F.3d 262, 266 (6th Cir.2003) ... The court finds that the majority rule should apply as to the factual scenario of Pedrina, allowing a plaintiff to use Rule 41(a) to dismiss all claims against one of multiple defendants, thus dismissing that defendant from the case.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Letherer v. Alger Group, L.L.C. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace