Russell v. Escobar

Full title: JAMES R. RUSSELL v. JOSE F. BONILLA ESCOBAR, ET. AL.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Jun 19, 2019

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 18-CV-00660-BAJ-EWD (M.D. La. Jun. 19, 2019)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 18-CV-00660-BAJ-EWD

06-19-2019

JAMES R. RUSSELL v. JOSE F. BONILLA ESCOBAR, ET. AL.

JUDGE BRIAN A. JACKSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

RULING AND ORDER

Before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 29) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Report and Recommendation addresses Petitioner's Motion to Remand (Doc. 22). The Magistrate Judge recommended the Motion be DENIED. (Doc. 29 at p. 17).

Petitioner raises a negligence claim arising from an automobile accident between himself and Defendant. (Doc. 1-4 at p. 3-4). On May 16, 2018, Petitioner filed his claim in the 19th Judicial District Court of Louisiana. (Id. at p. 1). On June 27, 2018, Defendant removed the case to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446 and 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (Doc. 1). Petitioner filed a motion to remand this case to the 19th Judicial District Court claiming this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. (Doc. 22). Specifically, Petitioner asserts Defendant has not established the required amount in controversy of $75,000 for claims based in diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (Id.).

The Report and Recommendation notified the parties that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had fourteen days from the date they received the Report and Recommendation to file written objections to the proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations therein. (Doc. 29 at p. 1). Neither party objected. Having carefully considered the underlying Motion and related filings, the Court approves the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and hereby adopts the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 29), is ADOPTED as the Court's opinion herein.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Remand (Doc. 22) is DENIED.

Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 19^th day of June, 2019.

/s/ _________

JUDGE BRIAN A. JACKSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA