Bongiorno v. AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company
Patti Bongiorno |
AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company |
4:2018cv02846 |
October 19, 2018 |
US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
R Bryan Harwell |
Insurance |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 18 REPLY to Response to Motion re #7 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Response filed by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Second Declaration of Cynthia Nelson)(Dixon, Joshua) |
Filing 17 TEXT ORDER granting #16 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Plaintiff's Response to AXA's motion to dismiss. Reply now due December 7, 2018. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 12/3/2018.(tmcb, ) |
Filing 16 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #12 Response in Opposition to Motion, by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. Response to Motion due by 12/14/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. Proposed order is being emailed to chambers with copy to opposing counsel. (Dixon, Joshua) Modified on 12/3/2018 to remove proposed order (lsut, ). |
Filing 15 TEXT ORDER granting #13 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's motion to dismiss. Reply now due December 3, 2018. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 11/26/2018.(tmcb, ) |
Filing 14 TEXT ORDER: Having reviewed the parties' responses to the Court's TEXT SUA SPONTE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, the Court is satisfied that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional amount and it has diversity jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 11/26/2018. (tmcb, ) |
Filing 13 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #12 Response in Opposition to Motion, by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. Response to Motion due by 12/4/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. Proposed order is being emailed to chambers with copy to opposing counsel.(Dixon, Joshua) |
Filing 12 RESPONSE in Opposition re #7 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Plaintiff's Brief In Response to Motmon Response filed by Patti Bongiorno.Reply to Response to Motion due by 11/26/2018 Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Connor, Lawrence) |
Filing 11 RESPONSE in Opposition re #7 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Plaintiff's Response to the Court's Text Order to Show Cause Concerning Amount in Controversy Response filed by Patti Bongiorno.Reply to Response to Motion due by 11/14/2018 Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. (Connor, Lawrence) |
Filing 10 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Declaration of Scott Davis, #2 Exhibit Declaration of Cynthia Nelson)(Dixon, Joshua) |
Filing 8 ORDER granting #6 Motion for Extension of Time within which AXA may serve its brief pursuant to the Court's Sua Sponte Text Order to Show Cause (ECF 3) is hereby extended until November 2, 2018 (2) and the time period within which Plaintiff may serve its responsive briefing is hereby extended to November 9, 2018. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 10/26/18.(swel, ) |
Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. Response to Motion due by 11/9/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Declaration of Cynthia Nelson)No proposed order.(Dixon, Joshua) |
Filing 6 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. Response to Motion due by 11/9/2018. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. Proposed order is being emailed to chambers with copy to opposing counsel.(Dixon, Joshua) |
Filing 4 SUA SPONTE TEXT ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: The Defendant removed this case from state court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1441 and 1446. Under 1441(a), a defendant is permitted to remove a case to federal court if the court would have had original jurisdiction over the matter. District courts have original jurisdiction "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between... citizens of different States." 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(1). In the instant case, the Defendant bases federal jurisdiction upon diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 1332. However, the Plaintiff did not specify any monetary amount of damages or clearly allege the jurisdictional amount in the Complaint, and the Defendant's notice of removal fails to allege facts adequate to establish that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional amount. Thus, the amount in controversy is unclear, and this Court may lack diversity jurisdiction. Removal statutes are strictly construed against removal, and any doubts concerning the propriety of removal must be resolved in favor of retained state court jurisdiction. Marshall v. Manville Sales Corp., 6 F.3d 229, 232 (4th Cir. 1993). In addition,"[t]he party seeking removal bears the burden of demonstrating that removal jurisdiction is proper." In Re Blackwater Security Consulting, LLC, 460 F.3d 576, 583 (4th Cir. 2006) (citation omitted). This includes establishing compliance with the removal statute requirements. See Marler v. Amoco Oil Co., 793 F. Supp. 656, 658-59 (E.D.N.C. 1992). Courts must narrowly interpret removal jurisdiction because of the significant federalism concerns that are raised by removing proceedings from state court. Id. Thus, all doubts are resolved in favor of remand. See Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets, 313 U.S. 100, 108-09 (1941); see also Mulcahey v. Columbia Organic Chems. Co., Inc., 29 F.3d 148, 151 (4th Cir. 1994). THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that, not later than five calendar days from the filing of this Order, Defendant shall brief the Court and SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be remanded to the State court for the foregoing reasons. Plaintiff shall file a response not later than five calendar days thereafter and, in that response, include a clarification as to whether Plaintiff intended to pursue, at the time of filing the original complaint, damages in excess of the jurisdictional amount of $75,000. If Plaintiff did not intend to pursue damages adequate to satisfy the jurisdictional threshold at the time of filing and if Plaintiff stipulates to such limitation having a binding effect, the Court will remand this matter to state court. Failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal without prejudice of Plaintiff's case. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 10/23/2018. (tmcb, ) |
Filing 3 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. (lsut, ) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Horry County Court of Common Pleas, case number 2018-CP-26-05289 (filing fee $400 receipt number 0420-8063959), filed by AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. (Attachments: #1 State Court Documents) (lsut, ) |
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: Bongiorno v. AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Patti Bongiorno | |
Represented By: | Lawrence Sidney Connor, IV |
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: AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company | |
Represented By: | Joshua Wallace Dixon |
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.