Epstein Secrets

t of removal. The removal statute was enacted specifically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [

er of jurisdiction" by examining "the true situation both as to parties and causes of action." Bernblum v. Travelers' Inc. Co., 9 F. Supp. 34, 35 (W.D. Mo. 1934) (emphasis added). See also id. (observing that "[t]he federal courts will . . . strike out the fiction injected into a case by a party to prevent

t of removal. The removal statute was enacted specifically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [

er of jurisdiction" by examining "the true situation both as to parties and causes of action." Bernblum v. Travelers' Inc. Co., 9 F. Supp. 34, 35 (W.D. Mo. 1934) (emphasis added). See also id. (observing that "[t]he federal courts will . . . strike out the fiction injected into a case by a party to prevent

t of removal. The removal statute was enacted specifically "to protect defendants." Legg v. Wyeth, 428 F.3d 1317, 1325 (11th Cir. 2005). Cf., e.g., Picquet v. Amoco Prod. Co., 513 F. Supp. 938, 941 (M.D. La. 1981) (explaining that courts developed the fraudulent-joinder doctrine to protect "the right [

ter of jurisdiction" by examining "the true situation both as to panics and causes of action." Bernblum v. Travelers' Inc. Co., 9 F. Supp. 34, 35 ( W.D. Mo. 1934) (emphasis added). See also id. (observing that "[t]he federal courts will . . . strike out the fiction injected into a case by a party to prevent