Harden v. Westlake Vinyls Company LP

Filing 7

AMENDED RULING AND ORDER adopting the 64 Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge as the Court's opinion. The 23 Motion to Remand is GRANTED and Civil Action 3:13-cv-268 is Remanded to the 23rd JDC, Ascension Parish. (Certified copy of this order sent to 23rd JDC) The Clerk of Court shall enter this Order in the docket for the Lead Case (3:12-cv-00253), and in the case-specific docket for civil action 3:13-cv-00268. Signed by Chief Judge Brian A. Jackson on 4/14/2014.(LLH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
BLAKE PERRITT, ET AL.
VERSUS

CIVIL ACTION
NO.: 3:12-cv-00253-BAJ-RLB

WESTLAKE VINYLS COMPANY,
LP, ET AL.

LEAD CASE
C/W 3:12-cv-00254-BAJ-RLB,
3:13-cv-00209-BAJ-RLB,
3:13-cv-00253-BAJ-RLB,
3:13-cv-00254-BAJ-RLB,
3:13-cv-00268-BAJ-RLB,
3:13-cv-00269-BAJ-RLB,
3:13-cv-00270-BAJ-RLB.

AMENDED RULING AND ORDER *
Before the Court is Plaintiff William Harden’s (“Harden”) MOTION
TO REMAND (Doc. 23). 1 The Magistrate Judge has issued a REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 64), recommending that the Court grant
Harden’s Motion, and that “the case be remanded to the 23rd Judicial
District Court, Ascension Parish, Louisiana,” (id. at p. 15).

Defendants

Westlake Chemical Corporation and Westlake Vinyls Company, LP

This Amended Ruling and Order amends the previous Ruling and Order (Doc. 71), which
incorrectly identified the Plaintiff as William Holden.
*

In a series of Orders, this Court consolidated related cases with Perritt, et al. v. Westlake Vinyls
Company, et al., 3:12-cv-00253, the lead case in this matter. (See 3:12-cv-00253 Doc. 3; Doc. 18; Doc.
20). In its May 28, 2013 Order, the Court explained that these cases are “consolidated for pretrial
management with CV 12-253,” and that the Court “will determine at a later appropriate time
whether any or all of these cases will be tried separately, as provided by Rule 42(b).” (Doc. at p. 2).
1

(collectively, “Westlake”) have filed written objections to the Magistrate
Judge’s Report. (Doc. 66).
Having carefully considered Harden’s MOTION (Doc. 23) and related
filings—including

Westlake’s

objections 2—the

Court

APPROVES

the

Magistrate Judge’s REPORT (Doc. 64) and the recommendation contained
therein, and ADOPTS it as the Court’s opinion.
Accordingly, for the reasons explained in the Magistrate Judge’s Report
(Doc. 64),
IT IS ORDERED that Harden’s MOTION TO REMAND (Doc. 23) is
GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that civil action 3:13-cv-00268 (William
Harden v. Westlake Vinyls Company, LP), is REMANDED to the 23rd
Judicial District Court, Ascension Parish, State of Louisiana.

Among other things, Westlake objects to the Magistrate Judge’s consideration of Harden’s “postremoval stipulation providing that his claims do not exceed $50,000.00, exclusive of interests and
costs, and that he would not seek or accept any judgment in state court exceeding that amount,”
(Doc. 64 at p. 14). See Doc. 66 at pp. 5–6. Westlake’s objection misses the mark. Even assuming
that the Magistrate Judge improperly considered Harden’s “post-removal stipulation,” it is not
facially apparent from Harden’s state-court petition that his “claims probably exceed $75,000,” and
Westlake did not otherwise “establish[] the facts in controversy in the removal petition or an
accompanying affidavit to show that the amount-in-controversy is met.” Felton v. Greyhound Lines,
Inc., 324 F.3d 771, 773 (5th Cir. 2003) (emphasis added). Accordingly, Westlake has not carried its
burden of “prov[ing] by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeds
$75,000.” Simon v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 193 F.3d 848, 850 (5th Cir. 1999).
2

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter this
Order in the docket for the lead case in this matter (3:12-cv-00253), and in
the case-specific docket for civil action 3:13-cv-00268.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 14th day of April, 2014.

______________________________________
BRIAN A. JACKSON, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

3