Medish v. Johns Hopkins Health System Corp., 272 F. Supp. 3d 719

Background

In May 2017 Vadim Medish and his parents sued Johns Hopkins Health System Corp. and Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH Defendants, Maryland citizens) and Dr. Subash Chandra (citizen of India and Iowa) in Baltimore City Circuit Court for medical negligence.
Two days after filing (and the same day the state court issued summonses), Dr. Chandra — before any defendant had been served — removed the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction.
Plaintiffs moved to remand within 30 days, arguing removal violated the forum-defendant rule (28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2)).
Plaintiffs later voluntarily dismissed Dr. Chandra, leaving only Maryland (forum) defendants; Plaintiffs argued this change required remand.
The district court granted defendants leave to file a surreply and held that removal violated § 1441(b)(2) because pre-service removal by a non-resident defendant here frustrated the rule’s purpose and constituted improper procedural removal.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether case must be remanded because remaining defendants are forum citizens after dismissal of removing defendant	Remand required because only forum defendants remain and defendants should litigate in home-state courts	Federal jurisdiction exists because diversity was present at time of removal; subsequent dismissal does not divest subject-matter jurisdiction	Court: jurisdiction existed at removal and continues, but that is not dispositive of removal propriety; retained jurisdiction but remand granted on procedural grounds
Whether removal by Dr. Chandra was barred by the forum-defendant rule in § 1441(b)(2) when no defendant had yet been served	Medish: forum-defendant rule prohibits removal because forum defendants were joined even if not yet served	Chandra: plain language requires defendants be "properly joined and served," and none had been served at removal, so removal was proper	Court: literal timing would incentivize gamesmanship; on these facts pre-service removal was improper and remand is warranted
Whether the forum-defendant rule is jurisdictional or procedural	Medish: violation merits remand; treats it as a substantive bar to removal	Defendants: forum-defendant rule is jurisdictional and case must remain in federal court	Court: forum-defendant rule is procedural (waivable); plaintiffs timely moved to remand for procedural defect, so remand permitted
Whether pre-service rapid removal (two days) constitutes gamesmanship that nullifies § 1441(b)(2)’s purpose	Medish: removal timing deprived plaintiffs of a reasonable opportunity to serve forum defendants and is improper	Defendants: timing is lawful under plain statutory text; defendants should not be penalized for being prompt	Held: rapid pre-service removal by the out-of-state defendant here undermined the statute’s purpose and incentivizes docket racing; remand appropriate

Key Cases Cited

Mulcahey v. Columbia Organic Chems. Co., 29 F.3d 148 (4th Cir. 1994) (party seeking removal bears burden; removal statutes construed strictly)
Marshall v. Manville Sales Corp., 6 F.3d 229 (4th Cir. 1993) (statutes restricting removal construed in favor of state-court jurisdiction)
Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., 541 U.S. 567 (2004) (jurisdiction depends on the state of things at the time jurisdiction is invoked)
Lively v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc., 456 F.3d 933 (9th Cir. 2006) (discussion of § 1441(b)(2) and legislative history treating forum-defendant rule as procedural)
Goodwin v. Reynolds, 757 F.3d 1216 (11th Cir. 2014) ("properly joined and served" language prevents plaintiff gamesmanship)
Reimold v. Gokaslan, 110 F. Supp. 3d 641 (D. Md. 2015) (pre-service removal with joined forum defendant held improper)
Oxendine v. Merck & Co., 236 F. Supp. 2d 517 (D. Md. 2002) (criticizing removability that hinges on timing of service and cautioning against docket-race outcomes)
Ziady v. Curley, 396 F.2d 873 (4th Cir. 1968) (purpose of diversity jurisdiction is to protect out-of-state litigants from local prejudice)