Mumfrey v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al., No. 12-40419 (5th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff appealed the district court's denial of his motion to remand his retaliation suit against CVS and the district court's conclusions of law. Plaintiff worked as a CVS pharmacist until his termination. The court concluded that CVS's removal was timely where the removal clock was not triggered until CVS received a copy of an "amended pleading, motion, order, or other paper from which" it was first ascertainable that the case was removable. The individual defendants were improperly joined because CVS demonstrated that plaintiff had no reasonable possibility of recovery against the individual defendants under Texas law. Therefore, the parties had complete diversity and the district court had jurisdiction. On the merits, plaintiff's retaliation claim failed where CVS terminated plaintiff for legitimate non-retaliatory reasons. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on June 26, 2013.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.