Lee et al v. B C Equipment Sales Inc et al

Filing 55

ORDER granting 53 Motion to Remand. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kathleen Kay on April 2, 2009. (crt,Benoit, T)

*4 LAKE CHA~.S, A L

RECEIVED

APR -flDU
TONY N. MOOSE. CLERK WETERN INSIIVOT OF LOIfl1ANA

UNiTED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAKE CHARLES D1VISION
*

JOSEPH PAUL LEE, ET AL. VERSUS BC EQUIPMENT SALES, INC., ET AL.

CIVIL NO. 07-377

*

JUDGE MINALDI
MAGISTRATE JUDGE KAY

*

ORDER Defendant Conmaco/Rector, L.P. removed this action to federal court from the 38th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Cameron, State of Louisiana on February 23, 2007. Doe. 1. Conmaco alleged federal diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§~332 and 1

1441. Id

Plaintiff is a citizen of Tangipahoa Louisiana. Id. Comnaco alleged that it is a partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and domiciled in the State of Delaware. Id Comnaco noted that all other defendants are alleged to be Texas Corporations. Id On March 4, 2009, plaintiffs filed a Motion to Remand. Doc. 53. Plaintiffs argue that they are entitled to remand because complete diversity does not exist in this case. In support, plaintiffs produce evidence that pursuant to the reorganization of Conmaco in bankruptcy, a Louisiana limited liability company named CRCG, L.L.C. (CRCG) became a general partner and another Louisiana limited liability company named NOLA Equipment L.L.C. (NOLA) became a limited partner in 2005. Doe. 53-4. Plaintiffs note that the accident underlying this lawsuit occuned in January of 2006, and suit was filed in 2007. See Doe. 1-2. Plaintiffs argue that the citizenship of limited and general partners is to be considered when determining whether

complete diversity is present. Doe. 53 (citing CT Carden

t'.

Ar/coma Assocs., 494 U.S. 185,

1108. Ct. 1015, 108 L. Ed. 24157(1990). Defendantsfflednooppositiontoplaintiffs' Motion
to Remand. "If at any time before final jHdgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded." 28 U.S.C.

§

1447. Here, plaintiffs have alleged that

remand is appropriate because the removing defendant, Conmaco, L.P. is a citizen of the state of Louisiana by virtue of the residence of its members CRCG and NOLA. Plaintiff's evidence on this point is unrebutted. The court therefore finds that remand is appropriate because complete diversitydoesnotexistinthiscase. Carden,494U.S. 185,1108. Ct. 1015, 108 LEd. 2d 157. THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Chambers at Lake Charles, Louisiana, on this9~day of

____,2009.

__

UNITED STATE

GISTRATE JUDGE