District Court Retains Jurisdiction after Remand to Sanction under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) as Well as Rule 11

Desert Schools Federal Credit Union v. Johnson, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12193 (9th Cir. June 15, 2011):

The Supreme Court has long held that a district court retains jurisdiction to impose Rule 11 sanctions even after a case has been dismissed. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 394-98 (1990). Further, this court has held that a district court retains jurisdiction to award attorney's fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) after a case has been remanded to state court, as "it is clear that an award of attorney's fees is a collateral matter over which a court normally retains jurisdiction even after being divested of jurisdiction on the merits." Moore v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc., 981 F.2d 443, 445 (9th Cir. 1992). In both Cooter & Gell and Moore, earlier actions had divested the court of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the cases. Thus, the district court had jurisdiction to impose Rule 11 sanctions in the amount of attorney's fees even after remanding the case to state court.

Share this article:

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on email
Email

Recent Posts

Archives