Opinion
Civil No. 14-1183 (SEC)
12-10-2014
DAISY MATOS-LEBRON, ET AL., Plaintiff, v. MONICA RIVERA-PIRIS, ET AL., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This diversity action, brought under Article 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, § 5141, concerns a rear-end collision accident. Docket # 1. Codefendant Monica Rivera-Piris moves to dismiss for want of subject-matter jurisdiction, Docket # 17, arguing that the plaintiffs fall short of meeting the amount-in-controversy requirement. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). For the reasons laid out below, this unopposed request is summarily GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The Court need not tarry. The short of it is that where, as here, a party waives any objections to a motion to dismiss, Docket # 22, a district court may summarily grant an unopposed dispositive motion, "'at least when the result does not clearly offend equity,'" Rodr í guez-Salgado v. Somoza-Colombani, 937 F. Supp. 2d 206, 210 (D.P.R. 2013) (quoting NEPSK, Inc. v. Town of Houlton, 283 F.3d 1, 7 (1st Cir.2002)), or "conflicts with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure." Town of Houlton, 283 F.3d at 7; see D.P.R. Civ. R. 7(b) ("[u]nless within fourteen (14) days after the service of a motion the opposing party files a written objection to the motion, incorporating a memorandum of law, the opposing party shall be deemed to have waived objection."). Neither impediment exists here. See Rivera-Qui ñ ones v. US Sec. Associates, No. 12-1598, 2013 WL 5636898, at *4 (D.P.R. Oct. 16, 2013). Quite the contrary: Rivera-Piris having questioned the plaintiffs' assertion that the amount in controversy satisfied the statutory jurisdictional amount, the burden shifted onto the plaintiffs to show with "'sufficient particularity' facts that in some way support the contention that there is more than $75,000 at stake." Abdel-Aleem v. OPK Biotech LLC, 665 F.3d 38, 42 (1st Cir. 2012) (quoting Dep't of Recreation & Sports of P.R. v. World Boxing Ass'n, 942 F.2d 84, 90 (1st Cir. 1991)). But because the plaintiffs neglected to oppose Rivera-Piris's motion, it follows inexorably that they cannot shoulder their burden of "proving" the existence of diversity jurisdiction. Johansen v. United States, 506 F.3d 65, 68 (1st Cir. 2007); see also, e.g., CE Design Ltd. v. Am. Econ. Ins. Co., 755 F.3d 39, 44 (1st Cir. 2014) (reiterating that "the party seeking to invoke jurisdiction," . . . "has the burden of showing it has met the amount-in-controversy requirement"). This action is accordingly dismissed, without prejudice to its being renewed in local court, for want of subject-matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1).
One loose end remains. Although Rivera-Piris crossclaimed against codefendant Padin Ambulance, Docket # 16; see Fed. R. Civ. P. 13(g), her crossclaim, which has no independent jurisdictional basis, need also be dismissed for want of subject-matter jurisdiction. Fairview Park Excavating Co. v. Al Monzo Constr. Co., 560 F.2d 1122, 1125 (3d Cir. 1977); New Orleans Public Belt R. Co. v. Wallace, 173 F.2d 145, 148 (5th Cir. 1949); see also 6 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 1433 & n. 14 (3d ed. Updated September 2014). Rivera-Piris's motion to compel, Docket # 26, is therefore moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED
In San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 10th day of December, 2014.
s/ Salvador E. Casellas
SALVADOR E. CASELLAS
U.S. Senior District Judge