Amendments to Removal Statute Allow Removal of Pure Admiralty Claims

The Fifth Circuit has yet to address whether the current version of the removal statute allows removal of purely maritime claims falling under 28 U.S.C. § 1333. In Bridges v. Phillips 66 Co., No. 13–477–JJB–SCR, Judge James Brady of the Middle District of Louisiana adopted this recommendation of the magistrate judge on November 18, 2013, which sheds light on the issue.

Plaintiffs filed seamen’s petition for damages for exposure to asbestos against their former employers and asserted claims in state court under Louisiana state law and under general maritime law. Defendants filed for removal of the case arguing that plaintiffs’ maritime claims fell under the original jurisdiction of the federal courts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1333, and alleging that removal was proper under the removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441.

Before § 1441(b) was amended in 2011, it allowed removal for any claim arising under the original jurisdiction of the United States if either one of two situations was satisfied: 1.) The claim or right must arise under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States, or 2.) The parties to the action must be diverse. Under both the prior and current versions of § 1441(a), a claim was removable to federal court unless “expressly provided by Act of Congress.” Based on the prior version § 1441(b), the Fifth Circuit held that maritime claims arising under § 1333 were not,

in and of themselves, claims that arose under the Constitution or laws of the United States, and thus, constituted an “Act of Congress” that prohibited removal under § 1441(a). Therefore, unless there was some other basis for federal jurisdiction such as federal question or diversity, a claim brought in state court that fell

solely under admiralty jurisdiction pursuant to § 1333 was not removable to federal court.

After § 1441(b) was amended, the statue omitted the key language of the prior version that limited removal to claims arising under the Constitution or other laws of the United States. Therefore, a claim falling under § 1333 no longer had to ‘arise under’ the Constitution or other laws of the United States in order to be removable from state court. Thus, plaintiffs’ action was removable to federal court because the claims fell under the original jurisdiction of the federal courts via § 1333.