Palmquist’s baby declined markedly in health after consuming baby food produced by Hain and sold by Whole Foods. She alleges that the baby food contained heavy metals, such as arsenic and lead, and that it caused her son’s decline. A resident of Texas, she aimed to try her suit in state court, where she thought she had a tactical advantage. That would be possible given that one of the defendants, Whole Foods, is also a Texas resident.
However, Hain convinced a district court that Whole Foods was improperly joined and, as the parties were now completely diverse (Delaware and Texas), successfully removed the case to federal court. Palmquist lost her case in federal court. She then appealed to the Fifth Circuit. There, she successfully argued that Whole Foods should not have been cut from the case, and that therefore the case should not have been removed to federal court. The Fifth Circuit sent the case back to the Texas state courts.
Hain appealed that decision to the Supreme Court. They contend that, even if Whole Foods was improperly cut, Palmquist already had her bite at the apple. To start over would be a waste and unfair to Hain, which prevailed on the first round. Palmquist observes, sensibly, that the mistake denied her an important and legitimate channel of litigation strategy.
The justice bot predicts that the Court will affirm (about 30 percent chance of reversal), meaning that Palmquist will have her chance in state court. A conservative bloc may dissent.
Vote Predictions
