Just ten days after oral argument, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a favorable ruling for the firm’s client holding that the federal district court did not have jurisdiction over the case.
The firm’s client had been sued in state court by Plains Capital Bank (PCB) under a breach of contract claim. Upon losing its motion for summary judgment, PCB non-suited the case in state court and re-filed in federal court with its basis for jurisdiction being that it was a federal holder in due course of the promissory notes at issue in the matter.
The federal district court denied a motion to dismiss filed by the firm and ultimately granted a summary judgment motion in favor of PCB. Although a writ of mandamus was filed, the firm did not respond to the lawsuit or summary judgment motion, relying on its position that the federal district court did not have subject matter jurisdiction.
An appeal was taken, and oral argument was held on the issue of whether the district court had federal question subject matter jurisdiction over the case based on PCB’s assertion that it was a federal holder in due course.
The Court, in its ruling on Wednesday, reversed the district court’s denial of the motion to dismiss, vacated its grant of summary judgment, and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. #successstories #representativematters