Case Explained: TUSHAWN CRAIG v. CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Filed: 2026-06-18 The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s order remanding the case to state court, holding that the “local event or occurrence” exception under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(11)(B)(ii)(I) of the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) is jurisdictional and applies to this action. The court determined that the industrial fire in Richmond, Indiana, constituted a single “event or occurrence” from which all claims in the lawsuit arose, thereby excluding the case from the definition of a removable “mass action.” The court applied de novo review to the statutory interpretation of CAFA’s jurisdictional requirements. It reasoned that because the exception defines the term “mass action,” it functions as a limit on subject matter jurisdiction rather than a discretionary waiver; consequently, the district court was authorized to raise the issue sua sponte. Regarding the scope of the exception, the court adopted a plain meaning approach, defining an “event or occurrence” as an incident that results in injury, which can include a continuing condition or a series of connected circumstances culminating in harm. The court rejected the defendants’ arguments that underlying tortious conduct (such as failure to maintain properties) or multiple defendants constituted separate events, clarifying that claims arise from the specific injury-causing event—the fire itself—rather than the antecedent conduct leading to it. As a practical consequence, the federal district court’s removal of the case was deemed improper due to a lack of subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA. The order remanding the lawsuit to Indiana state court stands, and the litigation must proceed in that forum. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.