Gooden v. National Union Fire Ins. Co.

N.D. Ohio

Gooden v. National Union Fire Ins. Co.

208 F. Supp. 2d 864, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12854, 2002 WL 1477326

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio

DecidedJune 4, 2002

Docket4:01CV02138

StatusPublished

This text of 208 F. Supp. 2d 864 (Gooden v. National Union Fire Ins. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gooden v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 208 F. Supp. 2d 864, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12854, 2002 WL 1477326 (N.D. Ohio 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER

POLSTER, District Judge.

On September 7, 2001, Defendant Lexington Insurance Company removed the above-captioned case to this Court from the Stark County Court of Common Pleas based upon diversity of citizenship. (ECF No. 1). On October 19, 2001, the Court issued an opinion in Kormanik v. St Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. (Case No. 5:01CV2122), remanding a similar Scott-Pontzer case for lack of jurisdiction based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1).

On October 24, 2001, the Court ordered the parties to this action to show cause why this case should not also be remanded. (ECF No. 16). On November 9, 2001, Defendants submitted a brief in which they argued that diversity jurisdiction existed because the insured, Motor Wheel Corporation, is a citizen of Michigan and not a citizen of Ohio. (ECF No. 18). On November 14, 2001, the Court issued an order finding that diversity jurisdiction existed in the case and that it should remain in federal court. (ECF No. 21).

*865 At a Case Management Conference held on December 6, 2001, the parties agreed to a February 1, 2002 deadline for joining parties and amending pleadings. (ECF No. 24). The parties subsequently sought an extension of the Case Management deadlines, which the Court granted. (ECF Nos. 26 and 28). As a result of the extension, the parties were given until May 31, 2002, to join additional parties and amend pleadings. (ECF No. 28).

On May 31, 2002, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint (ECF No. 1) adding two additional parties — Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Argonaut-Great Central Insurance Company. According to the Amended Complaint, both of these parties insured Hartville Foods, Inc., an Ohio Corporation which employed Plaintiff Naomi Gooden. Id. at ¶¶ 43, 44, 54, and 55. Because Plaintiffs are also residents of Ohio, the Court finds that the addition of these defendants destroys the diversity upon which this Court’s jurisdiction was based. See, e.g., Schuckman v. Rubenstein, 164 F.2d 952, 956 (6th Cir.1947) (“Even where a defendant, being a citizen of the same state of which one of the plaintiffs is also a citizen, is not an indispensable party, but nevertheless a proper party, his joinder as a defendant by the plaintiff destroys the necessary diversity of citizenship.”). Because diversity was the sole basis for the Court’s jurisdiction, the Court finds that the case must be remanded to the Stark County Court of Common Pleas.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER

POLSTER, District Judge.

On September 7, 2001, Defendant Lexington Insurance Company removed the above-captioned case to this Court from the Stark County Court of Common Pleas based upon diversity of citizenship. (ECF No. 1). On October 19, 2001, the Court issued an opinion in Kormanik v. St Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. (Case No. 5:01CV2122), remanding a similar Scott-Pontzer case for lack of jurisdiction based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1).

On October 24, 2001, the Court ordered the parties to this action to show cause why this case should not also be remanded. (ECF No. 16). On November 9, 2001, Defendants submitted a brief in which they argued that diversity jurisdiction existed because the insured, Motor Wheel Corporation, is a citizen of Michigan and not a citizen of Ohio. (ECF No. 18). On November 14, 2001, the Court issued an order finding that diversity jurisdiction existed in the case and that it should remain in federal court. (ECF No. 21).

*865 At a Case Management Conference held on December 6, 2001, the parties agreed to a February 1, 2002 deadline for joining parties and amending pleadings. (ECF No. 24). The parties subsequently sought an extension of the Case Management deadlines, which the Court granted. (ECF Nos. 26 and 28). As a result of the extension, the parties were given until May 31, 2002, to join additional parties and amend pleadings. (ECF No. 28).

On May 31, 2002, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint (ECF No. 1) adding two additional parties — Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Argonaut-Great Central Insurance Company. According to the Amended Complaint, both of these parties insured Hartville Foods, Inc., an Ohio Corporation which employed Plaintiff Naomi Gooden. Id. at ¶¶ 43, 44, 54, and 55. Because Plaintiffs are also residents of Ohio, the Court finds that the addition of these defendants destroys the diversity upon which this Court’s jurisdiction was based. See, e.g., Schuckman v. Rubenstein, 164 F.2d 952, 956 (6th Cir.1947) (“Even where a defendant, being a citizen of the same state of which one of the plaintiffs is also a citizen, is not an indispensable party, but nevertheless a proper party, his joinder as a defendant by the plaintiff destroys the necessary diversity of citizenship.”). Because diversity was the sole basis for the Court’s jurisdiction, the Court finds that the case must be remanded to the Stark County Court of Common Pleas.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 F. Supp. 2d 864, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12854, 2002 WL 1477326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gooden-v-national-union-fire-ins-co-ohnd-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack