Ricks v. Wal-Mart La.

Full title: AMY RICKS v. WAL-MART LOUISIANA, LLC, ET AL.

Court: United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana

Date published: Nov 18, 2024

Civil Action 24-1773 (E.D. La. Nov. 18, 2024)

Opinion

Civil Action 24-1773

11-18-2024

AMY RICKS v. WAL-MART LOUISIANA, LLC, ET AL.

BRANDON S. LONG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SECTION “O”

ORDER & REASONS

BRANDON S. LONG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This Court is duty-bound to examine the basis of subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte.¹ Subject matter jurisdiction in this case is premised upon diversity of citizenship.² Cases arising under 28 U.S.C. §1332 require complete diversity of citizenship.³ The concept of complete diversity requires that all persons on one side of the controversy be citizens of different states then all persons on the other side.⁴

1 Lane v. Halliburton, 529 F.3d 548, 565 (5^th Cir. 2008).

2 See 28 U.S.C. §1332; Doc. 1 at 1.

3 See Stiftung v. Plains Mktg., L.P., 603 F.3d 295, 297 (5^th Cit. 2010) (citations omitted).

4 McClaughlin v. Miss. Power Co., 376 F.3d 344, 353 (5^th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

On November 14, 2024, the Magistrate Judge granted Plaintiff's Motion to Amend.⁵ Plaintiff's First Amended, Supplemental, and Restated Complaint was thereafter filed in the record, naming Kelly Calagna as additional defendant in the above-captioned matter.⁶

5 ECF No. 25.

6 ECF No. 1-1.

In her state court petition, Plaintiff alleges that she is a resident of the state of Louisiana.⁷ And now, in her amended complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Kelly Calagna is an individual domiciled in the state of Louisiana.⁸ The parties are therefore not completely diverse.⁹ Accordingly, the Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter and this case must be remanded to state court.¹⁰

7 ECF No. 26.

8 ECF No. 26 at 1.

9 See McClaughlin, 376 F.3d at 353.

10 FED.R.CIV.P. 12(h)(3) (“If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.”); B&P Rest. Grp., LLC v. Eagan Ins. Agency, LLC, 538 F.Supp.3d 632, 637 (E.D. La. 2021) (“Remand to state court is appropriate if the federal court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.”)

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned matter is REMANDED to the 21st Judicial District Court for the Parish of Tangipahoa.