874 F.3d 390
4th Cir.2017Background
- Plaintiff Wayne Oliver sued in Maryland state court alleging asbestos exposure; Campbell-McCormick, Inc. (CMC) filed third-party claims against GE and others under Maryland’s UCATA.
- GE removed to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a) asserting the federal-contractor defense as federal-question removal basis.
- Oliver moved to sever and remand his state-law claims, asking the district court to decline supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c).
- The district court granted severance and remand of Oliver’s claims, but retained jurisdiction over and stayed CMC’s third-party UCATA contribution claims; the case was administratively closed subject to reopening.
- CMC appealed, asserting appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and invoking the collateral order doctrine to permit immediate review.
- The Fourth Circuit sua sponte examined appellate jurisdiction and solicited supplemental briefs before resolving whether the remand/severance order was appealable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court’s sever-and-remand order is a final § 1291 appealable decision | Oliver: Order is not final; remand/severance properly declines supplemental jurisdiction | CMC: Order is final under § 1291 because it ends the federal litigation on the merits or is appealable under collateral order doctrine | Not final: district court retained and stayed third-party federal claims, so order did not end federal litigation |
| Whether collateral-order doctrine gives § 1291 jurisdiction to review the remand/severance | Oliver: collateral-order inapplicable; no jurisdiction | CMC: collateral order doctrine applies because remand/severance conclusively resolves separable jurisdictional right and would be effectively unreviewable later | Collateral-order doctrine inapplicable: right asserted (to keep pendent state claims in federal court) is not sufficiently important to justify immediate review; doctrine remains narrow |
Key Cases Cited
- Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (articulating collateral order doctrine)
- Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1 (stay/remand under abstention appealable via collateral order)
- Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 517 U.S. 706 (remand for Burford abstention appealable under collateral order)
- Will v. Hallock, 546 U.S. 345 (setting three-part test for collateral order review)
- Mohawk Indus., Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (limits on collateral-order review for privilege rulings)
- Digital Equip. Corp. v. Desktop Direct, 511 U.S. 863 (refusing to expand collateral-order doctrine)
- Bryan v. BellSouth Commc’ns, 377 F.3d 424 (recognizing appealability of remand under § 1367(c))
- Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694 (Fourth Circuit reminder to verify appellate jurisdiction)
- Cobra Natural Res., LLC v. Fed. Mine Safety & Health Review Comm’n, 742 F.3d 82 (importance requirement analysis for collateral-order applicability)