Rock Hemp Corp. v. Dunn

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying plaintiff’s motion to remand its breach of contract action back to state court that had been removed to federal court and then granting defendants’ motion to dismiss instant case based on arbitration clause contained in said contract. Dist. Ct. could properly reject plaintiff’s claim that removal, which occurred months after case had been filed and certain discovery had occurred, was untimely, where: (1) complaint did not specify amount in controversy; (2) instant removal occurred seven days after plaintiff’s counsel emailed defendants' counsel with statement that plaintiff was seeking $250,000 in damages; and (3) said email was first notice that case was removable, and thus removal was timely, since it occurred within 30 days of said notice. Fact that defendants filed in state court motion to dismiss and began discovery prior to removing case did not constitute waiver of any right to remove case. Also, Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing case based on arbitration clause, where plaintiff’s claims came within scope of said clause. Moreover, plaintiff’s contention that defendants had fraudulently misrepresented subject-matter of contract did not require different result, where plaintiff never claimed that it was fraudulently induced into agreeing to arbitrate said issue.