Harris v. Magnum Express, LLC et al
| Robert A. Harris |
| Magnum Express, LLC and Magno A. Arana |
| 3:2019cv00791 |
| May 23, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Michael P Shea |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 20 MOTION for Disclosure Initial Rule 26(a)(1) by Robert A. Harris. (Savvaides, Anastasios) |
| Filing 19 Joint REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Mansfield, Lauren) |
| Filing 18 ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) and Affirmative Defenses by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC.(Mansfield, Lauren) |
| Filing 17 NOTICE of Appearance by Matthew J. Muttart on behalf of Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC (Muttart, Matthew) |
Filing 16
ORDER. The #14 motion for extension is GRANTED. The #15 notice states that Defendant Magno Arana is the sole member of Defendant Magnum Express, LLC. It appears that the defendants have therefore alleged complete diversity between the parties. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 6/13/2019. (Guevremont, Nathan)
|
| Filing 15 NOTICE by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC (Citizenship Statement) (Mansfield, Lauren) |
| Filing 14 MOTION for Extension of Time to file statement regarding citizenship by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC. (Mansfield, Lauren) |
|
Filing 13
ORDER. The #1 notice of removal does not appear to state an adequate basis for the Court's subject matter jurisdiction. "If subject matter jurisdiction is lacking and no party has called the matter to the court's attention, the court has the duty to dismiss the action sua sponte." Durant, Nichols, Houston, Hodgson & Cortese-Costa P.C. v. Dupont, 565 F.3d 56, 62 (2d Cir. 2009). The Defendants assert that the Court has jurisdiction over this case under 28 U.S.C. 1332 because there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties. The notice of removal states that Magnum Express, LLC is a "New Jersey corportation with its princip[al] place of business in New Jersey...." (ECF No. 1 at 2 2.) The citizenship of a limited liability company is not determined by its state of incorporation and principal place of business, but by the citizenship of its members. See Handelsman v. Bedford Vill. Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 213 F.3d 48, 51-52 (2d Cir. 2000) ("[F]or purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a limited liability company has the citizenship of its members.") (internal citation omitted). Within 14 days, the Defendants shall file a response on the docket stating the citizenship of each member of Magnum Express, LLC. If any member Magnum Express, LLC is itself an LLC, the plaintiff must also state the citizenship of each member of that LLC. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 5/24/2019. (Guevremont, Nathan)
|
| Filing 12 NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of #10 Electronic Filing Order, #9 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, #6 Notice (Other) filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC, #8 Notice of Appearance filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC, #3 Notice (Other) filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC, #11 Protective Order, #2 Notice (Other) filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC, #5 Jury Demand filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC, #7 Notice (Other) filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC, #4 Notice of Appearance filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC, #1 Notice of Removal, filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC Signed by Clerk on 05/23/2019. (Attachments: #1 Standing Order on Removed Cases) (Peterson, M) |
|
Filing 11
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 05/23/2019. (Peterson, M)
|
|
Filing 10
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 05/23/2019. (Peterson, M)
|
|
Filing 9
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 7/22/2019. Discovery due by 11/22/2019. Dispositive Motions due by 12/27/2019. Signed by Clerk on 05/23/2019. (Peterson, M)
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Lauren E. Mansfield on behalf of Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC (Mansfield, Lauren) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC re #1 Notice of Removal, (Notice to Counsel re Local Rule 5(b)) (Vossler, Christopher) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC re #1 Notice of Removal, (Compliance With Standing Order In Removed Cases) (Vossler, Christopher) |
| Filing 5 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC. (Vossler, Christopher) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher M. Vossler on behalf of Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC (Vossler, Christopher) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC re #1 Notice of Removal, (Notice of Pending Motions) (Vossler, Christopher) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC re #1 Notice of Removal, (Certificate of Filing and Service of Notice of Removal) (Attachments: #1 Superior Court Notice of Filing of Removal)(Vossler, Christopher) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC from Stamford Superior Court, case number FS1 FST CV 19 6041316S. Filing fee $ 400 receipt number ACTDC-5291000, filed by Magno A. Arana, Magnum Express, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Summons & Complaint)(Vossler, Christopher) |
| Judge Michael P. Shea added. (Oliver, T.) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
