Burlington Northern Railroad Co. v. Bell Et Al.

Background

Respondents brought a negligence suit in Oklahoma state court against the railroad company and an individual defendant. After seven days of trial the state court dismissed the individual defendant. The railroad filed a federal removal petition claiming diversity of citizenship. The state court continued the trial despite that petition, and a jury returned a verdict against the railroad. A federal district court later found the removal improper because the individual defendant had been dismissed on the merits rather than with the plaintiffs’ consent. The district court remanded the case, and the state trial court entered judgment on the jury’s verdict. The Oklahoma Court of Appeals rejected the railroad’s argument that the verdict and judgment were void under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(e), which bars state-court action while a properly filed removal is pending.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court denied the railroad’s petition for review, leaving the Oklahoma courts’ rulings in place. The majority did not resolve the central legal question whether a state court may proceed after a removal petition is filed. The opinion does not address which approach lower courts should follow when a removal petition is pending.

Real world impact

Because the Court refused review, the Oklahoma judgment remains in effect for now, and the broader disagreement among courts about who may act after removal stays unresolved. Parties in similar timing disputes may continue to face different results in different courts until the Supreme Court decides the issue or lower courts reach a consensus.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White dissented, saying the case presents a conflict among lower courts and that the Court should grant review to clarify whether state courts lose authority to act once a removal petition is filed.