A recent per curiam opinion of the D.C. Court of Appeals illustrates the general rule that upon removal, or remand from removal, the receiving court takes the case up where the transferring court left it off, and the receiving court treats the pretrial orders of the transferring court as if they were its own.
In this case, the federal district court granted summary judgment on claims which had created federal question jurisdiction. Then, rather than rule on the summary judgment motion as it pertained to non-federal claims, it remanded those claims to state court.
On remand, the Superior Court judge declined to permit the party opposing the summary judgment motion to supplement her opposition to the pending motion. The federal district court had refused to allow such supplementation in violation of its pretrial scheduling order, and the state court judge treated those orders as if they were its own, and likewise declined to permit the supplemental filings. That ruling was affirmed on appeal.
Recent Comments