Grice v. Toney et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM ORDER: The court is obligated to determine subject matter jurisdiction, including whether a party is improperly joined, on its own initiative. Accordingly, if Plaintiff contests the assertion DOTD was improperly joined, he must file a moti on to remand, supported by a memorandum, by 12/4/2017 and explain why there is a reasonable basis to predict state law would allow Plaintiff to recover against DOTD. If Plaintiff timely files a motion to remand, it will be noticed for briefing so rem oving defendants can respond. If Plaintiff does not timely file a motion to remand and challenge the improper joinder plea, the court will consider Plaintiff to concede the point, DOTD will be dismissed, and the case will proceed in this court. Compliance Deadline set for 12/4/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby on 11/7/2017. (crt,Putch, A)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION
CHARLIE GRICE

CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-cv-1434

VERSUS

CHIEF JUDGE HICKS

ROOSEVELT TONEY, ET AL

MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Charlie Grice filed this civil action in state court, and it was removed to this court
based on an assertion of diversity jurisdiction. The removing defendants acknowledge that
the presence of the State of Louisiana, through the Department of Transportation and
Development (“DOTD”), would destroy diversity, but they assert that its presence should be
ignored pursuant to the improper joinder doctrine outlined in Smallwood v. Illinois Central
RR Co., 385 F.3d 568 (5th Cir. 2004). Even if a plaintiff does not challenge an improper
joinder plea, the court is obligated to determine subject matter jurisdiction, including whether
a party is improperly joined, on its own initiative. Gasch v. Hartford Acc & Indem. Co. 491
F.3rd 278, 281 (5th Cir. 2007).
Accordingly, if Plaintiff contests the assertion that DOTD was improperly joined, he
must file a motion to remand, supported by a memorandum, by December 4, 2017 and
explain why there is a reasonable basis to predict that state law would allow Plaintiff to
recover against DOTD. If Plaintiff timely files a motion to remand, it will be noticed for
briefing so that the removing defendants can respond and attempt to meet their burden on the

improper joinder issue. If Plaintiff does not timely file a motion to remand and challenge the
improper joinder plea, the court will consider Plaintiff to concede the point, DOTD will be
dismissed, and the case will proceed in this court.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 7th day of November,
2017.

Page 2 of 2