From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McLain v. Harrington

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
Mar 2, 2020
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-00454 (W.D. La. Mar. 2, 2020)

Summary

granting remand due to the joinder of a nondiverse UM/UIM carrier and holding: “…the Court cannot state that there is no reasonable basis to predict that McLain might be able to recover against Farm Bureau. Though Removing Defendants and Hallmark presented summary-judgment-type evidence of Farm Bureau's subrogation claim amounts, no summary-judgment-type evidence was presented and no undisputed facts were established regarding White's quantum of damages for the Court to determine the potential remaining coverage available to McLain. The severity and extent of White's injuries are unknown. Therefore, the Court cannot determine the potential remaining coverage available to McLain under the Hallmark excess policy. If McLain cannot recover sufficient recovery from Hallmark for any reason, McLain may proceed against Farm Bureau as her UM insurer. The Court must resolve all disputed questions of fact and ambiguities in the controlling state law in favor of the plaintiff. Travis, 326 F.3d at 649. Therefore, Farm Bureau, a Louisiana citizen, is a properly joined party and this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.”

Summary of this case from Fields v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co.

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-00454

03-02-2020

SHEILA MCLAIN, Plaintiff v. EDWARD GENE HARRINGTON, ET AL., Defendants


MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES

JUDGMENT

For the reasons contained in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge previously filed herein, and after independent (de novo) review of the record including the objections filed herein, and having determined that the findings and recommendation are correct under the applicable law;

IT IS ORDERED that McLain's Motion to Remand (ECF No. 13) is GRANTED and that McLain's Motion for Attorney Fees (ECF No. 13) is DENIED. In so ruling we note our agreement that the lack of definition of White's damages and claim value, and especially the lack of evidence pertaining to such claims is the determinative factor in this remand.

THUS ORDERED AND SIGNED in chambers in Alexandria, Louisiana on this 2ND day of March, 2020.

/s/_________

DEE D. DRELL, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


Summaries of

McLain v. Harrington

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
Mar 2, 2020
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-00454 (W.D. La. Mar. 2, 2020)

granting remand due to the joinder of a nondiverse UM/UIM carrier and holding: “…the Court cannot state that there is no reasonable basis to predict that McLain might be able to recover against Farm Bureau. Though Removing Defendants and Hallmark presented summary-judgment-type evidence of Farm Bureau's subrogation claim amounts, no summary-judgment-type evidence was presented and no undisputed facts were established regarding White's quantum of damages for the Court to determine the potential remaining coverage available to McLain. The severity and extent of White's injuries are unknown. Therefore, the Court cannot determine the potential remaining coverage available to McLain under the Hallmark excess policy. If McLain cannot recover sufficient recovery from Hallmark for any reason, McLain may proceed against Farm Bureau as her UM insurer. The Court must resolve all disputed questions of fact and ambiguities in the controlling state law in favor of the plaintiff. Travis, 326 F.3d at 649. Therefore, Farm Bureau, a Louisiana citizen, is a properly joined party and this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.”

Summary of this case from Fields v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co.

granting remand due to the joinder of a nondiverse UM/UIM carrier and holding: “…the Court cannot state that there is no reasonable basis to predict that McLain might be able to recover against Farm Bureau. Though Removing Defendants and Hallmark presented summary-judgment-type evidence of Farm Bureau's subrogation claim amounts, no summary-judgment-type evidence was presented and no undisputed facts were established regarding White's quantum of damages for the Court to determine the potential remaining coverage available to McLain. The severity and extent of White's injuries are unknown. Therefore, the Court cannot determine the potential remaining coverage available to McLain under the Hallmark excess policy. If McLain cannot recover sufficient recovery from Hallmark for any reason, McLain may proceed against Farm Bureau as her UM insurer. The Court must resolve all disputed questions of fact and ambiguities in the controlling state law in favor of the plaintiff. Travis, 326 F.3d at 649. Therefore, Farm Bureau, a Louisiana citizen, is a properly joined party and this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.”

Summary of this case from McCrea v. Rapid Logistics, LLC
Case details for

McLain v. Harrington

Case Details

Full title:SHEILA MCLAIN, Plaintiff v. EDWARD GENE HARRINGTON, ET AL., Defendants

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

Date published: Mar 2, 2020

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-00454 (W.D. La. Mar. 2, 2020)

Citing Cases

McCrea v. Rapid Logistics, LLC

See also McIntosh v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, No. 18-9825, 2019 WL 3306532, at *2 (E.D. La. July 23,…

Fields v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co.

. See also McLain v. Herrington, No. 19- 454, 2020 WL 1025527, at *12 (W.D. La. Jan. 24, 2020), report and…