Reynolds v. Wal-Mart Stores East LP
Nicole Reynolds |
Wal-Mart Stores East LP |
2:2021cv02690 |
August 23, 2021 |
US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
Margaret B Seymour |
P.I.: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Both |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 13, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 REPLY by Wal-Mart Stores East LP to 7 Order,, 4 Order,,, Second Notice of Corporate Citizenship. (Bagley, Lee) |
Filing 8 REPLY by Wal-Mart Stores East LP to #6 Order Concerning Removal. (Bagley, Lee) |
Filing 7 TEXT ORDER: In its response #5 to the court's 4 Text Order, Defendant references principal place of business to demonstrate that it is a citizen of Arkansas. However, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, the citizenship of a limited liability company is determined by the citizenship of all of its members, not its principal place of business. Central West Virginia Energy Co., Inc. v. Mountain State Carbon, LLC, 636 F.3d 101, 103 (4th Cir. 2011). Within five business days of the entry of this text order, Defendant shall file a notice informing the court of its citizenship. Entered at the Direction of The Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 9/7/2021. (vdru, ) |
Filing 6 ORDER re #1 Notice of Removal, filed by Wal-Mart Stores East LP. Signed by Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 8/31/2021. (vdru, ) |
Filing 5 REPLY by Wal-Mart Stores East LP to 4 Order,,, Notice of Corporate Citizenship. (Bagley, Lee) |
Filing 4 TEXT ORDER: Defendant Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, removed this action from state court on the basis of diversity of citizenship, asserting that it is a citizen of both Delaware and Arkansas, as it is a Delaware limited partnership with its principal place of business in Arkansas. However, a limited partnership is a citizen in each state in which its partners, limited or general, are citizens. Carden v. Arkoma Associates, 494 U.S. 185 (1990). Defendant's answers to interrogatories assert only that its sole member is Wal-Mart Stores East, Inc. Within five business days of the entry of this text order, Defendant shall file a notice informing the court of its citizenship. Entered at the Direction of The Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 8/25/2021. (vdru, ) |
Filing 2 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Wal-Mart Stores East LP.(vdru, ) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Dorchester County Court of Common Pleas, case number 2021-CP-18-853. (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0420-10029652), filed by Wal-Mart Stores East LP. (Attachments: #1 State Court Documents, #2 Certificate of Service)(vdru, ). |
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 South Carolina 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
Search for this case: Reynolds v. Wal-Mart Stores East LP | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Nicole Reynolds | |
Represented By: | Johnny J Stewart, Jr |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Wal-Mart Stores East LP | |
Represented By: | Lee Ellen Bagley |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.