International Insurance Co. v. Duryee, 96 F.3d 837 (6th Cir. 1996),[1] was a case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit that held unconstitutional a statute enacted by the Ohio legislature that sought to discourage removal jurisdiction.[2]
| International Insurance Co. v. Duryee | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit |
| Full case name | International Insurance Company v. Harold T. Duryee, et al |
| Argued | June 6, 1996 |
| Decided | September 24, 1996 |
| Citations | 96 F.3d 837; 65 USLW 2231 |
| Case history | |
| Prior history | 55 F. Supp. 2d 799 (S.D. Ohio 1999) |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Gilbert S. Merritt Jr., R. Guy Cole Jr., Patrick J. Duggan (E.D. Mich.) |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Merritt, joined by a unanimous court |
| Keywords | |
| Removal jurisdiction | |
Decision
editTo limit removal jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1441, the Ohio legislature enacted a statute that barred any out-of-state insurance company from doing business in the state for three years if the insurer removed a case to federal court. The Sixth Circuit held that the statute was unconstitutional.[3]
References
edit- ^ International Insurance Co. v. Duryee, 96 F.3d 837 (6th Cir. 1996).
- ^ Yeazell, S.C. Civil Procedure, Seventh Edition. Aspen Publishers, New York, NY: 2008, p. 218
- ^ Yeazell, p. 218
External links
edit- Text of International Insurance Co. v. Duryee, 96 F.3d 837 (6th Cir. 1996) is available from: CourtListener Findlaw Justia OpenJurist Google Scholar