In City of Martinsville, Virginia v. Express Scripts, Inc., 128 F.4th 265 (4th Cir. 2025), two circuits now have forged the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 Coinbase v. Bielski decision into a powerful tool that saves savvy defendants from parallel state-court jurisdiction pending their appeal challenging a remand to state court.
These circuits read Coinbase to mean that if a defendant quickly appeals a remand order in the short window between (1) an electronic notice of the remand order, and (2) the federal court physically mailing it to the state court, then an automatic appellate stay immediately freezes district court proceedings and stops it from mailing the notice that transfers jurisdiction back to state court, pending appeal.
The Result
Appealing a remand order in the Fourth or Ninth Circuit is now a jurisdictional quickdraw with the district court clerk. If a defendant notices the appeal before the clerk mails out the remand order to the state court, then an automatic appellate stay triggers. Otherwise, that defendant must seek a permissive stay from the district court that just ruled against them and remanded the case, or from the state court.
The Fourth Circuit’s decision creates a 2-3 split. On one hand, the Fourth and Ninth Circuits read Coinbase broadly and extend its automatic-appellate-stay-of-everything rule to remand appeals. On the other hand, the First, Second, and Eleventh Circuits narrowly confine Coinbase to arbitration appeals.
Typically, remand orders are not appealable. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d). So, in addition to a quickdraw, an appellant must also be able to invoke one of the handful of grounds authorizing interlocutory appeal of a remand order. The relevant classics are:
- class action—discretionary appeal, per 28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1);
- acting under a federal officer—appeal by right, per 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442, 1447(d);
- civil rights case—appeal by right, per 28 U.S.C. §§ 1443, 1447(d);
- declining supplemental jurisdiction—appeal by right, see Carlsbad Tech., Inc. v. HIF Bio, Inc., 556 U.S. 635, 636 (2009); and
- prudential remand, not for procedural defect or lack of jurisdiction—appeal by right, see Powerex Corp. v. Reliant Energy Services, Inc., 551 U.S. 224, 229 (2007).
Crucially, if the case was removed in part under (2) or (3), then the entire remand order is reviewable on appeal—including otherwise nonreviewable grounds. See BP P.L.C. v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 593 U.S. 230 (2021). Some circuits will look past a pretextual, nonappealable ground when reviewing under (5). See, e.g., LeChase Constr. Services, LLC v. Argonaut Ins. Co., 63 F.4th 160, 162–63 (2d Cir. 2023). As a result, the Coinbase quickdraw and its automatic appellate stay are available in a broader range of cases than one might expect.
Looking Ahead
The deepening circuit split and implications for a wide range of federal cases mean this issue will likely return to the U.S. Supreme Court before long. In the meantime, if awaiting a decision on a motion to remand, make sure someone is minding the inbox and that they have quick reflexes.
Takeaways for Insurers
- In cases where an interlocutory appeal of a remand order is available, consider filing fast. In at least two circuits, the reward for beating the district court clerk to the punch is an automatic appellate stay instead of being forced to seek a permissive stay from a court likely disinclined to grant it.
- Look for opportunities to extend Coinbase into new contexts, such as appraisal. Coinbase reasoned that when the question on appeal is “whether the litigation may go forward in the district court,” then “the entire case is essentially ‘involved in the appeal’” and so automatically stayed. That logic extends not just to remand and arbitrability but also, e.g., to the mandatory appraisal clause in an insurance policy.