Keith Gemaehlich v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation

Background

Betty and Keith Gemaehlich moved to remand, or return, the case to Alameda Superior Court. Their complaint alleged that Keith Gemaehlich’s mesothelioma was caused at least in part by his work with and around asbestos-containing products manufactured or supplied by various defendants during his U.S. Navy service between 1960 and 1964.

John Crane Inc. removed the case under the federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). John Crane argued that, to the extent it supplied asbestos-containing basket and packing material to the Navy, it did so under military procurement contracts and complied with government design, testing, and labeling specifications.

The plaintiffs did not initially contest removal on the merits. Instead, they stipulated to dismiss John Crane, and the court granted that dismissal. Crosby Valve opposed remand, arguing that the valves it supplied to the Navy conformed to Navy specifications. The plaintiffs then stipulated to dismiss Crosby Valve, and the court granted that dismissal as well.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that federal officer removal is an exception to the usual rule that a case may be removed only when the federal court would have original jurisdiction over the claims. A party invoking that statute must show that it is a covered “person,” that its actions under federal direction have a causal connection to the plaintiff’s claims, and that it has a plausible federal defense.

The court did not decide whether John Crane or Crosby Valve had established those requirements. Instead, it exercised its discretion under the supplemental-jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c), after those defendants were dismissed. The court found that the Gemaehlichs brought only state-law tort claims, which substantially predominated in the case. It also noted that the other defendants had not consented to John Crane’s removal, joined Crosby Valve’s withdrawn opposition, or filed their own oppositions to the motion to remand.

The court further reasoned that no defendant had shown that another federal officer defense would support retaining jurisdiction and that the case had been filed only recently. Because the court had not substantially committed judicial resources to the case, it concluded that remand was proper.

Disposition

The court granted the Gemaehlichs’ motion to remand. It returned the case to Alameda Superior Court and vacated the hearing scheduled for April 21, 2023.