Blaylock v. Hartford et al

Filing 7

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 in full. Complaint 2 is DISMISSED. Any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Susan P. Watters on 8/7/2015. Mailed to Blaylock. (TAG, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
BILLINGS DIVISION

FILED
AUG 0 8 2015
Clerk, U.S. District Court
District Of Montana
Billings

NATHAN MARK BLAYLOCK,
CV 15-64-BLG-SPW
Plaintiff,
ORDER

vs.
BRANDON HARTFORD, GAB
ROBINS, GREAT NORTHWEST
INSURANCE, and PROPERTY
OWNER OF LAUREL GARDENS,
Defendants.

Nathan Blaylock filed a Complaint on July 9, 2015 against the Defendants
alleging breach of contract and negligence. At least Blaylock and Defendant
Brandon Hartford are Montana citizens. United States Magistrate Judge Carolyn
Ostby entered Findings and Recommendations on July 17, 2015, in which she
recommended that this Court dismiss Blaylock's Complaint due to the lack of
federal subject matter jurisdiction. Blaylock timely objected, and therefore he is
entitled to de novo review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l).
After a de novo review, this Court finds that Judge Ostby correctly
determined that this action lacks federal subject matter jurisdiction. There are two
grounds for federal subject matter jurisdiction. First, federal courts have original
jurisdiction ifthere is complete diversity among the parties and the amount in
1

controversy is at least $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Complete diversity means
that "each of the plaintiffs must be a citizen of a different state than each of the
defendants." Morris v. Princess Cruises, Inc., 236 F.3d 1061, 1067 (9th Cir.
2001 ). Second, federal courts have original jurisdiction if the action arises under
federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
Here, there is no diversity jurisdiction. Plaintiff Blaylock and Defendant
Hartford are both citizens of Montana. Also, this action does not arise under
federal law. Breach of contract and negligence are both state law claims. Federal
court is not the proper place for Blaylock to bring this action.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. Judge Ostby's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 5) are ADOPTED
IN FULL.
2. Blaylock's Complaint (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED.
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this matter and enter judgement
pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to have the docket reflect that the Court
certifies pursuant to Rule 24(a)(3)(A) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
that any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith.

2

~

DATED thi' _2 d•y of Augu'C 2015.

~

_p.~~~_L__e-==-=~'--~-·-..
SUSANP. WATTERS
United States District Judge

3