CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
TIFFANY DAVENPORT, et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
LOCKWOOD, ANDREWS & NEWNAM, INC., et al.,
Defendants,

VEOLIA WATER NORTH AMERICA OPERATING SERVICES, LLC,
Defendant-Appellant
   No. 17-1200
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Ann Arbor.
No. 5:16-cv-12875—John Corbett O’Meara, District Judge.
Decided and Filed: April 25, 2017
Before: NORRIS, BATCHELDER, and GIBBONS, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. This case arises out of defendant Veolia Water North America Operating Services, LLC’s (“Veolia”) and other defendants’ allegedly negligent conduct in connection with the Flint, Michigan water crisis. The sole issue on appeal is the meaning of “other class actions” under the local controversy exception to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d). The district court found that plaintiffs had met the requirements for the local controversy exception to CAFA and remanded this matter to the Michigan state courts. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the district court’s order to remand the case to state court and find that the local controversy exception is inapplicable to this case.



CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
IN RE: OHIO EXECUTION PROTOCOL.
___________________________________________

ANGELO FEARS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

GARY OTTE; RONALD PHILLIPS; RAYMOND TIBBETTS,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
DONALD MORGAN, et al.,
Defendants-Appellants.
   No. 17-3076
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus.
No. 2:11-cv-01016—Michael R. Merz, Magistrate Judge.
Decided and Filed: April 25, 2017
Before: COLE, Chief Judge; BATCHELDER, MOORE, CLAY, GIBBONS,
ROGERS, SUTTON, McKEAGUE, GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE,
WHITE, STRANCH, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
ORDER
_________________________

A majority of the Judges of this Court in regular active service has voted for rehearing en banc of this case. Sixth Circuit Rule 35(b) provides as follows:

The effect of the granting of a hearing en banc shall be to vacate the previous opinion and judgment of this court, to stay the mandate and to restore the case on the docket sheet as a pending appeal.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED, that the previous opinion and judgment of this court are vacated, the mandate is stayed and this case is restored to the docket as a pending appeal.