McAtee

McAtee v. Capital One, F.S.B.

Good Law
479 F.3d 1143·2007 WL 840370·2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 6058
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 16, 2007No. 07-55065California2,739 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Melodie McAtee, a California citizen, was the substituted plaintiff in an amended complaint filed in California state court before the effective date of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”), Pub.L. No. 109-2, 119 Stat. 4 (2005) (codified in scattered sections of 28 U.S.C.), naming as defendants Capital One, F.S.B., Capital One Services, and John Doe defendants 1 to 20. After the effective date of CAFA, McAtee amended her complaint to substitute Capital One Bank for one of the Doe defendants. Capital One Bank removed the action to federal district court based on the supposed authority of CAFA. Capital One Bank argued that the substitution “commenced” a civil action within the meaning of CAFA, and that CAFA therefore applied to McAtee’s suit and authorized removal.

The district court remanded, holding that McAtee’s action commenced upon the filing of the original complaint. We affirm.

I. Procedural Background

This action has a lengthy procedural history. On August 13, 2004, Susanne Ball filed a complaint in Orange County Superi- or Court under section 17204 of the California Business and Professions Code. Ball’s complaint named as defendants Capital One, F.S.B. and…

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.