Morning Star Associates, Inc. et al v. Unishippers Global Logistics, LLC
ORDER that the 57 USCA Mandate is made the Order of this Court. It Is Further Ordered that Plaintiffs shall file their amended complaint with the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order. It Is Further Ordered that, upon the filing of Plaintiffs' aforementioned forthcoming amended complaint, this case shall be stayed pending the completion of arbitration and closed for all purposes of statistical reporting without the need for further order or action from this Court and/or its Clerk. Either party may, by written motion, seek to re-open this matter following arbitration if appropriate and necessary. Amended Complaint due by 3/13/2017. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 02/27/2017. (thb) Modified on 2/27/2017 (thb).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MORNING STAR ASSOCIATES,
INC.; ROBERT McMAHON;
and MARGARET HERRMANN,
On February 27, 2015, Plaintiffs instituted the instant
case against Defendant. (Doc. No. 1.) On March 25, 2015,
Defendant moved to dismiss this case and compel Plaintiffs to
submit their claims against Defendant to arbitration in
accordance with the terms of the parties' agreements. (Doc.
No. 11.) On May 20, 2015, this Court granted Defendant's
motion to the extent that it sought to compel arbitration and
stayed this case pending the completion of arbitration.'
(Doc. No. 33.) Plaintiff Christopher Herrmann subsequently
' The Court also denied Plaintiff Christopher Herrmann's
motion for preliminary injunction, ordered that this case be
closed for all purposes of statistical reporting, and
instructed the parties that they could move "to re-open this
matter following arbitration is appropriate and necessary."
(Doc. No. 33, at 28-29.)
appealed this matter to the United States Court of Appeals for
the Eleventh Circuit. (Doc. No. 37.)
On December 14, 2015, the Eleventh Circuit remanded the
above-captioned case to this Court for the purpose of
determining whether the parties were completely diverse when
this suit commenced. (Doc. No. 44.) This Court subsequently
re-opened this case and granted Plaintiffs leave to conduct
limited jurisdictional discovery. (Docs. No. 50, 52.)
Plaintiffs thereafter submitted evidence of Defendant's
citizenship and the parties filed briefs indicating that
diversity jurisdiction in fact existed. (Docs. No. 54, 55.)
Accordingly, on May 12, 2016, this Court entered an Order
finding that diversity jurisdiction did in fact exist at the
time Plaintiffs initiated this case; (b) directing this matter
be returned to the Eleventh Circuit for further proceedings;
and (c) closing this case. (Doc. No. 56.)
The Eleventh Circuit has now dismissed Plaintiff
Christopher Flerrmann's appeal on the grounds that the Eleventh
Circuit lacked jurisdiction to review this Court's Order dated
May 20, 2015 because, inter alia, the aforementioned Order "is
not a final, appealable order." (Doc. No. 57.) Nevertheless,
the Eleventh Circuit granted Plaintiff Christopher Herrmann's
"motions to amend his pleadings to properly allege
[Defendant's] citizenship and to supplement the record with
evidence of tJn±shippers Holdings's citizenship . . .
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Mandate of the
Eleventh Circuit is made the Order of this Court.
that Plaintiffs shall file their amended
complaint with the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14)
days from the date of this Order. 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED
that, upon the filing of Plaintiffs' aforementioned
forthcoming amended complaint, this case shall be
pending the completion of arbitration and
purposes of statistical reporting without the need for further
order or action from this Court and/or its Clerk. Either
party may, by written motion, seek to re-open this matter
following arbitration if appropriate and necessary.
ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia, this
As noted in the Eleventh Circuit's Mandate, Plaintiffs'
amendments to their complaint shall be limited to properly
alleging Defendant's citizenship.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?