William S. Knox v. John Davis Trucking Company, Inc.

Filing 24

ORDER GRANTING 8 Motion to Remand to State Court. This case is hereby remanded to the Second Judicial District Court of Washoe County, Nevada. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Certified Copy of Order and docket entries sent to Second Judicial District Court) Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 1/30/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

WILLIAM S. KNOX,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
JOHN DAVIS TRUCKING COMPANY,
)
INC., a domestic Nevada corporation; ABC )
CORPORATIONS I-X; BLACK and WHITE )
COMPANIES I-X; and JOHN DOES I-X,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
JOHN DAVIS TRUCKING COMPANY,
)
INC., a domestic Nevada corporation,
)
)
Third-Party Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
)
CORPORATION a/k/a AMTRAK; and
)
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, )
)
Third-Party Defendants.
)
)

ORDER

Before the court is Plaintiff William S. Knox’s Motion to Remand (#81). Defendant John
Davis Trucking Company, Inc. filed an opposition (#19), and Plaintiff replied (#22).

25
26

3:11-CV-00842-LRH-WGC

1

Refers to the court’s docket entry number.

1

This is a wrongful death action arising out of a highly-publicized accident on June 24, 2011,

2

involving an AMTRAK train and a truck owned by John Davis Trucking. On July 6, 2011,

3

Plaintiff William S. Knox filed the underlying complaint in state court, naming only John Davis

4

Trucking and does as defendants. It is alleged and undisputed that John Davis Trucking is a

5

Nevada corporation, doing business in Washoe County. On November 21, 2011, John Davis

6

Trucking removed the action to this court (#1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b) on the basis of this

7

court’s diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Following removal, on December 8, 2011,

8

John Davis Trucking filed a Third Party Complaint (#4) against the National Railroad Passenger

9

Corporation (a.k.a. Amtrak) and the Union Pacific Railroad Company. Plaintiff now moves this

10

court to remand the action to state court because removal was improper under the forum defendant

11

rule.

12

In diversity cases, removal is permitted “only if none of the parties in interest properly

13

joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought.” 28

14

U.S.C. § 1441(b). “Separate and apart from the statute conferring diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C.

15

§ 1332, § 1441(b) confines removal on the basis of diversity jurisdiction to instances where no

16

defendant is a citizen of the forum state.” Lively v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc., 456 F.3d 933, 939 (9th

17

Cir. 2006). Here, it is undisputed that Defendant John Davis Trucking is a resident of Nevada.

18

Removal was therefore not permitted under § 1441(b), and remand to state court is required.

19

The court rejects John Davis Trucking’s argument that its filing of a third party complaint

20

against Amtrak and concerns regarding judicial economy require a different result. At the time

21

John Davis Trucking filed its petition for removal, it had yet to file its third party claims. And even

22

if the timing were otherwise, that this court may have original jurisdiction over any claims John

23

Davis Trucking may have against a third party is immaterial to this court’s jurisdiction over the

24

claims asserted against it by William Knox.

25
26

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (#8) is GRANTED.
2

1

This case is hereby remanded to the Second Judicial District Court of Washoe County, Nevada.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

DATED this 30th day of January, 2012.

4
5
6

__________________________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

3