384 F. Supp. 3d 780
E.D. Ky.2019Background
- Uboh sued several defendants in Fayette Circuit Court (KY) for breach of contract, wage claims, and defamation; USEF was named as a defendant and had its principal place of business in Kentucky.
- Defendants removed the case to federal court on diversity grounds; removal papers included affidavits showing some defendants consented.
- After removal, Uboh and three defendants filed a joint stipulation to remand; the court denied it because no legal basis for remand was provided.
- Uboh moved to alter that denial, asserting the forum-defendant rule (28 U.S.C. § 1441(b))—that removal is improper when a defendant is a citizen of the forum state—required remand.
- Defendants responded that Uboh waived any objection to removal by signing an employment agreement with USEF containing a forum-selection clause consenting to federal courts in the District of Kentucky and waiving forum non conveniens and similar defenses.
- The court found complete diversity and amount-in-controversy sufficient and held the forum-selection clause constituted a prospective waiver of the forum-defendant procedural objection, so it denied Uboh’s motion to reconsider.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether removal was improper under the forum-defendant rule (28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)) | Uboh argued removal was defective because USEF was a Kentucky citizen, so the case must be remanded. | Defendants argued Uboh contractually waived any objection to federal forum by agreeing to a federal-court forum-selection clause and waiver of forum non conveniens. | Court held the forum-defendant rule is a waivable procedural defect and Uboh’s forum-selection clause constituted a prospective waiver of that defense; denial of reconsideration affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375 (federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction)
- Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1 (forum-selection clauses are prima facie valid and enforceable unless unreasonable)
- Wong v. PartyGaming Ltd., 589 F.3d 821 (6th Cir.) (forum-selection clauses should be upheld absent strong showing)
- Lively v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc., 456 F.3d 933 (9th Cir.) (forum-defendant rule is procedural and waivable)
- RFF Family P’ship, LP v. Wasserman, [citation="316 F. App'x 410"] (6th Cir.) (forum-defendant provision is a procedural removal requirement that can be waived)
- Hackworth v. Guyan Heavy Equip., Inc., 613 F. Supp. 2d 908 (E.D. Ky.) (removal in violation of § 1441(b) is a procedural defect that can be waived)