Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist | Case No. 24-724 | Oral Argument Date: 11/4/25 | Docket Link: Here

Overview

Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Hain Celestial Group versus Palmquist, a forum fight about when courts keep cases they never should have had. A Texas family sued two companies over their child's heavy metal poisoning from baby food—but after a federal court wrongly kicked out one defendant and ran a two-week trial, an appeals court said the case never belonged in federal court, forcing everyone back to square one.

Questions Presented:

1. Whether a district court's final judgment as to completely diverse parties must be vacated when an appellate court later determines that it erred by dismissing a non-diverse party at the time of removal.
2. Whether a plaintiff may defeat diversity jurisdiction after removal by amending the complaint to add factual allegations that state a colorable claim against a nondiverse party when the complaint at the time of removal did not state such a claim.

Oral Advocates:

• For Petitioner (Hain and Whole Foods): Sarah E. Harrington, Washington, D.C.
• For Respondent (Palmquist): Russell S. Post, Houston, Texas

Link to Opinion: TBD.

Website Link to Opinion Summary: TBD.

Website Link to Oral Argument: TBD.

Timestamps:

[00:00:00] Argument Overview

[00:00:42] Argument Begins

[00:00:50] Petitioner Opening Statement

[00:03:08] Petitioner Free for All Questions

[00:26:21] Petitioner Sequential Questions

[00:26:24] Respondent Opening Statement

[00:28:31] Respondent Free for All Questions

[00:40:05] Petitioner Rebuttal