Alabama Electric Company, Inc. of Dothan et al v. Dow Corning Alabama, Inc. et al

Filing 16

OPINION AND ORDER: It is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that plaintiffs motion to remand (doc. no. 9 ) is granted and that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), this cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Houston County, Alabama. I t is further ORDERED that any and all other pending motions are left for disposition by the state court after remand. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to take appropriate steps to effect the remand. This case is closed in this court. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 9/28/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist) Copy mailed to Clerk, Houston County, Alabama as directed.(dmn, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION
ALABAMA ELECTRIC COMPANY,
INC. OF DOTHAN and
NATIONAL TRUST INSURANCE
COMPANY,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiffs,
v.
DOW CORNING ALABAMA,
INC., et al.,
Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO.
1:15cv96-MHT
(WO)

OPINION AND ORDER
This lawsuit, which was removed from state to federal
court based on diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction, 28
U.S.C.

§§

1332,

1441,

is

plaintiffs’ motion to remand.

now

before

the

court

on

“In a removal case alleging

fraudulent joinder, the removing party has the burden of
proving

that

plaintiff

can

either:

(1)

establish

a

there
cause

is

no

possibility

of

action

against

the
the

resident defendant; or (2) the plaintiff has fraudulently
pled jurisdictional facts to bring the resident defendant
into state court. ... The burden of the removing party is a
‘heavy one.’” Crowe v. Coleman, 113 F.3d 1536, 1538 (11th

Cir. 1997) (citations omitted).
The court agrees with plaintiffs that this case should
be remanded to state court because there has been neither
fraudulent joinder, Coker v. Amoco Oil Co., 709 F.2d 1433,
1440 (11th Cir. 1983); Cabalceta v. Standard Fruit Co., 883
F.2d

1553,

1561

(11th

Cir.

1989),

nor

fraudulent

misjoinder, Tapscott v. MS Dealer Service Corp., 77 F.3d
1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 1996).

***

Accordingly, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of
the court that plaintiffs’ motion to remand (doc. no. 9) is
granted and that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), this
cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Houston County,
Alabama.
It is further ORDERED that any and all other pending
motions are left for disposition by the state court after
remand.
The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to take appropriate
2

steps to effect the remand.
This case is closed in this court.
DONE, this the 28th day of September, 2015.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson___
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3