Regina Lewis v. State Farm, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK REGINA LEWIS, Plaintiff, ORDER -against- 23-CV-08089 (PMH) STATE FARM, et al. Defendants. PHILIP M. HALPERN, United States District Judge: Plaintiff commenced this action on September 12, 2023, asserting products-liability and negligence claims under state law against defendants State Farm and John W. Owens. (Doc. 2). Although the Complaint does not provide the basis for the Court’s jurisdiction, reviewing the pleading with all requisite liberality, there is no federal question presented. (Id.). Plaintiff separately wrote the Court and advised that jurisdiction is purportedly predicated upon 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2), which requires that the matter in controversy exceed $75,000 and be maintained between “citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state.” (Doc. 23). Plaintiff and defendant Owens both appear to be citizens of the State of New York. (See Doc. 2; Doc. 4; Doc. 14; Doc. 18; Doc. 22; Doc. 23). Generally, in light of the solicitude accorded pro se litigants, a district court must grant a plaintiff an opportunity “‘to drop dispensable nondiverse defendants whose presence would defeat diversity of citizenship.’” Pearson v. Reid- Robinson, 632 F. App’x 19 (2d Cir. 2016) (summary order) (quoting Jaser v. N.Y. Prop. Ins. Underwriting Ass’n, 815 F.2d 240, 243 (2d Cir. 1987)). Accordingly, Plaintiff may, by August 22, 2024, amend her Complaint to cure the diversity issue (for example, by dropping the non-diverse defendant Owens). Plaintiff is warned that the failure to cure the diversity issue, otherwise show that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action, or to timely comply with the Court’s order will result in dismissal of the Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff. SO ORDERED: Dated: White Plains, New York July 22, 2024

Philip M. Halpern United States District Judge