LEDEE et al v. FELIPE EXPRESS et al

Filing 64

ORDER adopting 61 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS that Plaintiffs' 57 motion to remand be DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 08/17/2021. (jdb)

Case 3:15-cv-07075-FLW-DEA Document 64 Filed 08/17/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 1512

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
MYRIAM LEDEE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

Civil Action No. 15-7075 (FLW)

v.

ORDER

FELIPE EXPRESS, et al.,
Defendants.

THIS MATTER having been opened to the Court by the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation, dated August 3, 2021, recommending that the Motion for Remand filed by
Plaintiffs Perfecto Hernandez and Lucia Hernandez (“Plaintiffs”) be denied; it appearing that in
support of their motion, Plaintiffs argued that the amount in controversy cannot be met and,
therefore, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction; it appearing, more specifically, that Plaintiffs
argued that as a result of the adjudication of certain claims by and against 21st Century Centennial
Insurance Company (“21st Century”), any potential recovery by Plaintiffs can no longer meet the
$75,000 threshold; it further appearing that the Magistrate Judge correctly found, however, that
notwithstanding the adjudication of claims by and against 21st Century a court evaluates the
amount in controversy as of “the time that the complaint was filed,” Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v.
Stevens & Ricci Inc., 835 F.3d 388, 395 (3d Cir. 2016), or, in the case of removal, “as of the date
of removal,” Meritcare Inc. v. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co., 166 F.3d 214 (3d Cir. 1999) (abrogated
on other grounds, Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc., 545 U.S. 546 (2005)); and
therefore, it has been long-established that “events occurring subsequent to removal which reduce
the amount recoverable … do not oust the district court’s jurisdiction,” St. Paul Mercury Indem.

1

Case 3:15-cv-07075-FLW-DEA Document 64 Filed 08/17/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 1513

Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 U.S. 283, 293 (1938); accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation,
IT IS on this 17th day of August, 2021,
ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation dated August 3,
2021, is hereby ADOPTED, because the Court has not been divested of its jurisdiction to
adjudicate this case; and it is further
ORDERED that the Motion for Remand filed by Plaintiffs Perfecto Hernandez and Lucia
Hernandez be denied.
.
/s/ Freda L. Wolfson
Hon. Freda L. Wolfson
U.S. Chief District Judge

2