Charles v. Western Express Inc. et al
| Glendon Charles |
| Western Express Inc. and Michael Kevin Bunjer |
| 1:2019cv05790 |
| October 14, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Pamela K Chen |
| Roanne L Mann |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 4, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court has reviewed and adopts in its entirety the Honorable Roanne L. Mann's #5 Report & Recommendation, recommending remand of the action. Defendants filed a partial objection, noting that they are in possession of a police report confirming that Plaintiff was injured as a result of the accident. However, information about Plaintiff's injuries does not suffice to establish the amount in controversy required for federal subject matter jurisdiction. See Valente v. Garrison From Harrison LLC, No. 15-CV-6522 (DLI) (MDG), 2016 WL 126375, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 11, 2016). The Court finds that the Report & Recommendation is neither "clearly erroneous" nor "contrary to law." See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Therefore, as recommended, this action is hereby remanded to New York State Supreme Court, Kings County, under Index No. 518598/2019. Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 11/4/2019. (Shi, Yi Qing)
|
| Filing 6 First MOTION to Remand to State Court by Michael Kevin Bunjer, Western Express Inc.. (Raven, Keith) |
| Filing 5 SUA SPONTE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re #1 Notice of Removal filed by Western Express Inc., Michael Kevin Bunjer. This Court respectfully recommends that the action be remanded to the Supreme Court of New York, Kings County. Objections to R&R due by 10/29/2019. See attached for discussion. Ordered by Chief Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann on 10/15/2019. (Proujansky, Josh) |
| Filing 4 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 3 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Case assigned to Judge Pamela K. Chen and Chief Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 2 Civil Cover Sheet.. Re #1 Notice of Removal by Michael Kevin Bunjer, Western Express Inc. (Raven, Keith) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Michael Kevin Bunjer, Western Express Inc. from Supreme Court of the State of New York, case number County of Kings. ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number ANYEDC-11940541) (Raven, Keith) |
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 New York Eastern 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.
