Tyson
Clipperjet Inc. v. Tyson
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Ikola, J.
*522 After defendant Randal Tyson's first failed attempt at removing the case to federal court, his codefendant, Dulany Hill, filed a second notice of removal. Hill's notice of removal was identical to the one defendant had filed and merely substituted Hill's name in the place of defendant's name. During this second removal period, the court denied defendant's untimely motion to strike, which was fully briefed before the second notice of removal was filed. Less than a month later, the federal court again remanded the case. Thereafter, defendant failed to respond to the complaint or to appear for a *523 case management conference. The court entered defendant's default. Defendant took no further action in the case until eight months after the remand, when he moved to set aside the default. The court denied the motion and entered a default judgment against defendant.
Defendant appeals from the default judgment. He contends the court did not have jurisdiction to rule on his motion to *36 strike while the case was removed to federal court. He claims the court's ruling on the motion to strike, while it purportedly lacked jurisdiction, commenced an inappropriate responsive pleading…