From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Amica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gaslamp Ins. Servs.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION
Jan 30, 2020
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-00754-RWS (E.D. Tex. Jan. 30, 2020)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-00754-RWS

01-30-2020

AMICA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. GASLAMP INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., PREFERRED CONTRACTORS INSURANCE COMPANY, RRG, Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff Amica Mutual Insurance Company filed this action in the 416th Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas, on June 20, 2019. Defendant Preferred Contractors Insurance Company RRG, LLC ("PCIC"), removed the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, and this Court referred the matter to the Honorable Kimberly C. Priest Johnson, United States Magistrate Judge, at Sherman, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this Court.

Defendant Gaslamp Insurance Services, Inc. has filed motion to remand the action to state court. Docket No. 5. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the motion be granted because Gaslamp never consented to the removal petition, rendering it defective, and because Gaslamp has expressly stated that it would not give its written consent to removal, which is required by the Fifth Circuit for removal to be proper. Docket No. 7 at 3-4.

The Court has considered the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to the Court's referral order, along with the record and pleadings. No parties filed objected to the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, PCIC is not entitled to de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and except upon grounds of plain error, PCIC is barred from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Assoc., 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the pleadings in this case and the Report of the Magistrate Judge and agrees with the Report of the Magistrate Judge. See United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 683 (1980) ("[T]he statute permits the district court to give to the magistrate's proposed findings of fact and recommendations 'such weight as [their] merit commands and the sound discretion of the judge warrants . . . .' ") (quoting Mathews v. Weber, 23 U.S. 261, 275 (1976)).

The Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the Motion to Remand is GRANTED. The above-captioned case is hereby REMANDED to the 416th Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 30th day of January, 2020.

/s/_________

ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Amica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gaslamp Ins. Servs.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION
Jan 30, 2020
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-00754-RWS (E.D. Tex. Jan. 30, 2020)
Case details for

Amica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gaslamp Ins. Servs.

Case Details

Full title:AMICA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. GASLAMP INSURANCE SERVICES…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

Date published: Jan 30, 2020

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-00754-RWS (E.D. Tex. Jan. 30, 2020)