Sexton v. Exxon Mobil Corporation et al

Filing 61

OPINION Adopting 42 Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge; denying 18 Motion to Remand (certified copy mailed to appropriate judicial district court). Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 1/3/2018. (EDC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LEROY SEXTON
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NO. 17-482-JWD-RLB
EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION,
ET AL.
OPINION
After independently reviewing the entire record in this case and for the reasons set forth in
Magistrate Judge's Report dated September 15, 2017, to which an objection was filed:
IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (R. Doc. 18) is DENIED.
Though the Court is sympathetic to the policy concerns raised by the Plaintiff and believes the
“forum defendant rule” to be a tad hyper-technical in this case, the Court finds that 28 U.S.C. §
1441(b)(2) is clear and unambiguous; it prohibits removal of an action only “if any of the parties
in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action
is brought.” Id. (emphasis added). Because Defendant Zachary was not “properly joined and
served” at the time of removal, the plain language of § 1441(b)(2) does not require remand.
Perhaps more importantly, even if there were ambiguity in the statute, the overwhelming authority
in this circuit supports the Magistrate Judge’s position. (See R&R, Doc. 42 at 5–6; Defendant’s
Reply to Objections, Doc, 47 at 3–4.)

As a result, the Plaintiff’s objections are OVERRULED.

Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on January 3, 2018.

S

JUDGE JOHN W. deGRAVELLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

19th JDC