• Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

liskow_lewis_white_new

future-focused

  • Team
  • Practices
  • Insights
  • Blogs

5th Circuit Grants En Banc Rehearing to Address Federal Officer Removal

05.17.19 | 3 minute read

After years of inconsistent rulings, the Fifth Circuit is poised to address a removal issue with significant ramifications for Louisiana tort cases. The previous version of 28 U.S.C. § 1442 authorized removal to federal court of a suit against a federal officer “only when the state suit was ‘for any act under color of such office.’” The Fifth Circuit, interpreting this language, held that the removing party must show a causal connection between its actions and the plaintiff’s claims. The causal connection requirement demands more than “mere federal involvement[;] instead, the defendant must show that its actions taken pursuant to the government’s direction or control caused the plaintiff’s specific injuries.”

In 2011, Congress amended § 1442 to allow removal of a state suit against a federal officer “for or relating to any act under color of such office.” While the Third and Fourth Circuits shifted their jurisprudence to comply with this new language, the Fifth Circuit has not. Instead, it continues to apply the pre-amendment causal nexus test to post-amendment cases.

This outdated approach is a casualty of the Fifth Circuit’s “rule of orderliness.” Under that rule, a 3-member panel may not overturn a prior panel “absent an intervening change in law, such as by statutory amendment, or the Supreme Court, or the en banc Court.” With respect to federal officer removal, the first case to interpret the new statute was Bartel v. Alcoa Steamship Co. But rather than acknowledge the effect of the 2011 amendment, the Bartel court continued to apply pre-amendment jurisprudence.  This meant that subsequent Fifth Circuit panels would be bound by Bartel.

Despite this bar, the Fifth Circuit has slowly chipped away at Bartel’s viability. In Zeringue v. Crane Company, the Fifth Circuit reaffirmed Bartel but recognized that the 2011 amendment broadened the scope of the statute. In Savoie v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc., the court denied en banc rehearing on procedural grounds but found there was a “colorable argument that, in regard to the negligence claims, this action is removable because of the 2011 statutory amendment . . . .” In Legendre v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc., the court—again constrained by Bartel—stated that “a revised approach may have merit.” The Court explained that “by adding ‘relating to,’ Congress preserved a nexus requirement, but it is unclear the relationship must be causal.”

Latiolais v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. is the latest Fifth Circuit panel to be handcuffed by the rule of orderliness. This time, however, the court provided extensive commentary criticizing its current approach. The court ultimately affirmed remand “but in hopes that our precedents will be reordered.” Those precedents may finally be “reordered” when the Fifth Circuit rehears Latiolais en banc. Oral argument is set for the week of September 23, 2019.

Whatever the Fifth Circuit decides, the outcome will have a tremendous impact on Louisiana tort cases. For more information about this Article or related issues, please contact attorneys Sara Grace Sirera (ssirera@liskow.com), Philip Dore (pdore@liskow.com), or Scott Seiler (scseiler@liskow.com).

Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the law firm of Liskow & Lewis, APLC (“Liskow & Lewis”) and the individual Liskow & Lewis lawyers posting to this site for educational purposes and to give you general information and a general understanding of the law only, not to provide specific legal advice as to an identified problem or issue. By using this blog site you understand and acknowledge that there is no attorney client relationship formed between you and Liskow & Lewis and/or the individual Liskow & Lewis lawyers posting to this site by virtue of your using this site. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state regarding a particular matter.

Privacy Policy: By subscribing to Liskow & Lewis’ E-Communications, you will receive articles and blogs with insight and analysis of legal issues that may impact your industry. Communications include firm news, insights, and events. To receive information from Liskow & Lewis, your information will be kept in a secured contact database. If at any time you would like to unsubscribe, please use the link located at the bottom of every email that you receive.

Primary Sidebar

Related Practices

  • Appellate
  • Litigation

Related Team

  • Scott C. Seiler
Liskow & Lewis, APLC
Arrow Icon

future-focused

  • Baton Rouge
  • Houston
  • Lafayette
  • New Orleans
  • New York City
  • © 2026 Liskow & Lewis, APLC
  • Sitemap
  • Disclaimer
  • Employee Login
Site by
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
Cookie SettingsAccept All
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT
  • Team
  • Practices
  • Insights
  • Blogs
  • Offices
  • Pro Bono
  • About Us
  • Careers
  • DEI
  • The Energy Law Blog
  • Gulf Coast Business Law Blog
  • The Maritime Law Blog