Levias et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co et al
JUDGMENT adopting 13 Report and Recommendations. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (doc. 7) is DENIED. Signed by Judge James D Cain, Jr on 8/2/2022. (crt,Benoit, T)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAKE CHARLES DIVISION
MERCEDEE LEVIAS ET AL
CASE NO. 2:21-CV-02628
JUDGE JAMES D. CAIN, JR.
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE
INSURANCE CO ET AL
MAGISTRATE JUDGE KAY
The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (doc. 15) having been
considered, together with the written objections thereto filed with this Court, and, after a
de novo review of the record, the undersigned finds that the Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation reaches the right conclusion. However, there is no evidence in the record
that Plaintiff’s counsel purposefully concealed the dismissal of State Farm Mutual
Automobile Insurance Company and Caleb Murry. What is clear, is that counsel for State
Farm prepared the Motion for Partial Dismissal and filed same into the state court record.
The state court Clerk of Court failed to provide notice of the dismissal. It further appears
that when the Motion for Dismissal of State Farm and Murry was filed, Defendants, United
Financial Casualty Insurance Company (“United”) and Progressive Security Insurance
Company (“Progressive”), were not served with the dismissal because service was not
requested State Farm upon filing. Thus, Defendants, United and Progressive, were not
given due process because they were not provided notice of dismissal of the non-diverse
party. However, undersigned will not impute the fault of State Farm to Plaintiff’s counsel
for failing to request service. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (doc. 7) is DENIED.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Chambers this 2nd day of August, 2022.
JAMES D. CAIN, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?