Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist · ¶14

The District Court sided with Hain. Under Fifth Circuit precedent, which was not disputed here, a defendant is improperly joined if the plaintiff fails to “state a claim for relief that is facially plausible” against the defendant. 103 F. 4th 294, 304 (2024); see Smallwood v. Illinois Central R. Co., 385 F. 3d 568, 573 (2004) (en banc). Applying that test, the District Court concluded that the Palmquists had not alleged a plausible claim against Whole Foods. It thus dismissed Whole Foods and denied the Palmquists' motion to remand.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.