BARDROFF v. KEITECH USA LLC

• Court: District Court, D. New Jersey
• Decided: January 31, 2022
• Docket: 2:21-cv-15044
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

HAROLD BARDROFF, Plaintiff, Civ. No, 2:21-15044 (WJM)

ORDER KEITECH USA, LLC AND MICHAEL CZAPLINSKI, Defendants.

WILLIAM J. MARTINI, U.S.D.J.: This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, ECF No. 2, The Court decides the motion without oral argument pursuant to Fed, R, Civ. P, 78(b). Defendants have not filed any opposition to Plaintiff's remand motion. Upon careful review of Plaintiff’s motion, and The Court noting that pursuant to the “saving to suitors” provision of 28 U.S.C, § 1331(1), Plaintiff initiated this action in state court for negligence for injuries sustained as a passenger in Defendant Michael Czaplinski’s boat; and The Court further noting that a maritime claim filed in state court undet the “savings to suitors” clause is a case at law rather than admiralty. See Glazer v. Honeywell Int’l. Inc., No. 16-7714, 2017 WL 1943953, at *3 (D.N.J. May 10, 2017), Therefore, removal of “saving to suitors” actions are permitted only if there exists an independent basis for jurisdiction. See Sea-Land Serv., Inc. v. J & W Imp./Exp., Inc., 976 F. Supp. 327, 329 (D.N.J. 1997) (citing Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354, 371—

72, 79 S.Ct. 468, 479-80, 3 L.Ed.2d 368, (1959); see also U.S. Express Lines Ltd. y. Higgins, 281 F.3d 383, 390 Gd Cir. 2002); and The Court further noting that this Court lacks any independent basis for subject matter jurisdiction over this action; and for good cause shown; IT IS on this Af th day of January 2022, hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion to remand is GRANTED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter shall be remanded to New Jersey Superior Court, Law Division, Bergen County; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall close this matter.

fe