Lynnetta Ellison v. Autozone Inc

Good Law
486 F. App'x 674
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 19, 201212-56569California328 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

AutoZone, Inc. appeals the order of the district court remanding the case to state court. The remand order was issued sua sponte after Ellison had dismissed her only remaining class claim, leaving just an individual claim before the court. We reverse.

We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”). 28 U.S.C. § 1453 (e); see also Abrego Abrego v. Dow Chemical Co., 443 F.3d 676, 678-79 (9th Cir.2006) (per curiam); Kingvision Pay-Per-View Ltd. v. Lake Alice Bar, 168 F.3d 347, 351-52 (9th Cir.1999). We review the district court’s remand order de novo. United Steel v. Shell Oil Co., 602 F.3d 1087, 1090 (9th Cir.2010).

Ellison filed class and individual claims against Autozone in state court, and Auto-zone removed the action to federal court under CAFA. All but one of Ellison’s class claims were severed and transferred to another forum, and Ellison dismissed her only remaining claim, insofar as it was on behalf of a class, voluntarily. This left before the district court a single claim on behalf of Ellison as an individual. The district court sua sponte remanded the case to state court for lack of jurisdiction.

Where, as here,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.