Reported / Citable
Background
Kandice Haseloff-Bunker brought an employment lawsuit that defendants removed from state court on federal-question grounds. At the initial scheduling conference, the court determined that its docket did not contain all documents from the state-court proceedings, including an apparently missing motion filed by Haseloff-Bunker.
The case is a consolidated action involving two separate cases removed from state court. The court noted that 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) requires a removing defendant to file copies of all process, pleadings, and orders served on it.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison held that the omission of state-court papers from the removal record is a curable procedural defect, not a jurisdictional flaw requiring remand. The court relied on Fifth Circuit and district-court authority recognizing that a removing party may supplement an incomplete removal record.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(b), the court ordered the City of Angleton to file the complete state-court record as a supplement to its notice of removal. Because the federal case consolidates two removed state actions, the City must file records from both state-court proceedings.
Key Takeaways
- An incomplete state-court record accompanying a notice of removal does not itself defeat federal jurisdiction.
- Federal courts may require the removing party to supplement the record with omitted state-court materials.
- In a consolidated removed action, the required supplementation includes records from each underlying state case.
Why It Matters
The order reinforces that failures to attach all required state-court papers under § 1446(a) generally can be corrected after removal rather than resulting in remand. Removing defendants should nevertheless ensure that the full record is promptly filed, particularly when multiple state actions have been consolidated.