Muzak v. Melcher et al
| Wendy Muzak |
| Robert L. Melcher and Hill Rom, LLC |
| 1:2021cv06538 |
| November 23, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Frederic Block |
| Sanket J Bulsara |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Tort/Motor Vehicle (P.I.) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 30, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Hill Rom, LLC, Robert L. Melcher (Abramson, Joshua) |
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: On November 23, 2021, Defendants filed a Notice of Removal (Dkt. No. 1) to federal court under 28 U.S.C. 1332, 1441 and 1446. Defendants allege this Court has diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a) because the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the parties are diverse. (Id. para. 3). "The party seeking to invoke jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332 bears the burden of demonstrating that the grounds for diversity exist and that diversity is complete." Advani Enters., Inc. v. Underwriters at Lloyds, 140 F.3d 157, 160 (2d Cir. 1998).Section 1332(a) requires complete diversity among the plaintiffs and defendants for a federal court to exercise diversity jurisdiction. Herrick Co. v. SCS Commc'ns, Inc., 251 F.3d 315, 322 (2d Cir. 2001) ("[D]iversity jurisdiction is available only when all adverse parties to a litigation are completely diverse in their citizenships."). For the purposes of diversity, a limited liability company takes the citizenship of each of its members. Bayerische Landesbank v. Aladdin Cap. Mgmt. LLC, 692 F.3d 42, 49 (2d Cir. 2012). And "[f]or purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a party's citizenship depends on [her] domicile." Linardos v. Fortuna, 157 F.3d 945, 948 (2d Cir. 1998). "[T]he domicile of a party to a diversity of citizenship case is the place where that individual has a true, fixed home and principal establishment, and to which, whenever that person is absent from the jurisdiction, he or she has the intention of returning[.]" 13E Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure 3612 (3d ed. 2021); Palazzo ex rel. Delmage v. Corio, 232 F.3d 38, 42 (2d Cir. 2000). The Notice of Removal explains that Hill-Rom Logistics, LLC ("Hill-Rom") is an Indiana corporation with a principal place of business in Illinois and that it was improperly plead as Hill-Rom, LLC in the Complaint, but neither the Complaint nor the Notice of Removal disclose Defendant Hill-Rom's members or their citizenships for the purposes of diversity. As a result, the Court is unable to conclude whether it possesses diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332(a). By 12/6/2021, Defendants must show cause why this action should not be remanded. To the extent that Defendants contend that there is diversity jurisdiction, they must allege the domicile of each of the members of Hill-Rom Logistics, LLC. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara on 11/29/2021. (Morrow, Emily)
|
| Filing 4 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Neptune, Pierre) |
| 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. (Neptune, Pierre) |
| This case has been opened in the Eastern District of New York. If you plan to continue representing your client(s), you must be admitted to practice before this court. You must do so by applying for Pro Hac Vice or permanent admission. To apply for Pro Hac Vice admission, you must first register for an ECF login and password. Please visit the Court's website at www.nyed.uscourts.gov/attorney-admissions for guidance. Once registered, you must electronically file a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. You must pay the required pro hac vice fee online. (Neptune, Pierre) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Frederic Block and Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara. 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. (Neptune, Pierre) |
| Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Hill Rom, LLC, Robert L. Melcher identifying Corporate Parent Hill-Rom Company, Inc., Other Affiliate Hill-Rom Holdings, Inc., Other Affiliate Hill-Rom, Inc., Other Affiliate Advanced Respiratory, Inc. for Hill Rom, LLC. (Abramson, Joshua) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Hill Rom, LLC from Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings, case number 515134/2021. ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ANYEDC-15056469) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A to Notice of Removal, #3 Exhibit B to Notice of Removal) (Abramson, Joshua) |
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.
