Svendsen v. Dolgencorp L L C

Filing 16

ORDER granting 6 Motion to Remand. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's unopposed Motion To Remand is GRANTED and the February 17, 2016 hearing on the Motion is CANCELED. The Clerk of this Court is to remand this action to the Fifteenth Judicial District Court, Lafayette Parish, Louisiana. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carol B Whitehurst on 2/17/2016. (crt,Dauterive, C)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
Svendsen

Civil Action No. 6:15-02756

versus

Judge Rebecca F. Doherty

Dolgencorp LLC

Magistrate Judge Carol B. Whitehurst
ORDER

Before the Court is an unopposed Motion To Remand filed by Plaintiff, Andreas
Svendsen, [Rec. Doc. 6] and Defendant, Dolgencorp LLC’s (“DG”), opposition thereto [Rec.
Doc. 10]. Plaintiff originally filed this action in the Fifteenth Judicial District Court,
Lafayette Parish, Louisiana alleging he suffered personal injuries when he slipped and fell
on water left on the floor in the Dollar General Store located at 5283 Mire Highway in
Rayne, Louisiana. R. 1-2. DG filed a Notice of Removal to this Court on November 30, 2015
contending that the Court has diversity jurisdiction in this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1332. R. 1. Based on the record and the law, the Court finds that remand is appropriate.
Federal district courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing only the power
authorized by the Constitution and by statute. Halmekangas v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co.,
603 F.3d 290, 292 (5th Cir.2010). Accordingly, federal courts have subject-matter jurisdiction
only over civil actions presenting a federal question and those in which the amount in
controversy exceeds $75,000 and the parties are citizens of different states. 28 U.S.C. §§
1331, 1332. When an action is removed from state court, as this suit was, the removing party
bears the burden of proving that federal-court jurisdiction exists. Shearer v. Southwest
Service Life Ins. Co., 516 F.3d 276, 278 (5th Cir.2008). Accordingly, DG, the removing
party, has the burden of establishing that this Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this
action.

Plaintiff initially argued that remand is appropriate in this case based on the stipulation
in the Petition which states, “Petitioners [sic] aver that the amount in controversy for the
above captioned cause of action does not exceed $75,000.00 exclusive of interests and costs”
R. 1-2, ¶ 13. In Louisiana, a plaintiff is not permitted to plead a specific dollar amount of
damages. Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 893(A)(1); see, also, In re 1994 Exxon
Chemical Fire, 558 F.3d 378, 388 (5th Cir. 2009). Thus, “[l]itigants who want to prevent
removal must file a binding stipulation or affidavit with their complaints.” De Aguilar v.
Boeing Co., 47 F.3d 1404, 1412 (5th Cir.1995). While it is arguable whether Plaintiff’s
jurisdictional statement in his Petition is a “binding stipulation or affidavit,” Plaintiff
executed and filed into the record a post-removal binding Stipulation stating that he “will not
at any time seek to obtain or execute or obtain any Judgment which exceeds” $75,000.00.1
R. 13. As a result, GD filed a motion to withdraw his opposition which the Court granted. R.
14; 15.
Based on the foregoing,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion To Remand is GRANTED and
the February 17, 2016 hearing on the Motion is CANCELED. The Clerk of this Court is to
remand this action to the Fifteenth Judicial District Court, Lafayette Parish, Louisiana.
Thus done and signed this 17th day of February, 2016 at Lafayette, Louisiana.

1

Plaintiff’s Remand contains a post-removal “Stipulation” signed by plaintiff’s attorney in this
action stating that this “matter has a value of less than $75,000.00.” R. 6-2.