Shorraw v. Bell
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina
2016 WL 3586675 (2016)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
Georgette Shorraw (plaintiff), a South Carolina resident, was riding in a car driven by Frederick J. Bell, also a South Carolina resident, when Bell lost consciousness because of a defect in his Riata Automatic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Lead (the defibrillator) and crashed into another car. Shorraw suffered injuries in the crash. Shorraw filed a lawsuit in state court against St. Jude Medical S.C. (St. Jude) (defendant), a nonresident of South Carolina, alleging negligence, strict liability, and breach of express and implied warranty related to defects in the defibrillator. Shorraw also named Bell as a defendant in the lawsuit but did not request any damages from him. St. Jude removed the case to federal court. Shorraw moved to remand the case, citing Bell’s citizenship, but the district court denied the motion after finding that Bell was a nominal defendant whose citizenship should not be considered in the diversity-jurisdiction analysis. Shorraw amended her complaint to add Scott Kramer, a South Carolina citizen who worked as a technical-services specialist for St. Jude, as a defendant. Shorraw claimed that Kramer acted negligently regarding Bell’s defibrillator. Shorraw based her allegations against Kramer on affidavits from Robert G. Dismukes, a technical service representative for various medical-device companies. After the addition of Kramer, the district court remanded the case. One year later, St. Jude removed the case to federal court on the ground that Shorraw fraudulently joined Kramer to destroy diversity jurisdiction. Shorraw filed a motion to remand the case, arguing that St. Jude’s removal was untimely under 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(3) and that she added Kramer in a strategic move not motivated by bad faith.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Childs, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.