Craft v. Longs Drug Stores California, L.L.C.
- Jacquelyn Corley
- 3:24-cv-04596
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Craft v. Longs Drug Stores California, Judge Corley remanded the case because Longs did not establish diversity jurisdiction after identifying a Bay Hill member’s California citizenship.
The remand affects Cynthia Craft, Longs Drug Stores California, L.L.C., Bay Hill, and the other defendants because the case returns to San Mateo County Superior Court rather than remaining in federal court.
What happened
In Craft v. Longs Drug Stores California, L.L.C., Longs Drug Stores removed the case from San Mateo County Superior Court to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. Longs initially did not provide the citizenship information required for co-defendant Bay Hill.
The court ordered Longs to provide more information about the citizenship of Bay Hill’s members and the other defendants. Longs later reported that one of Bay Hill’s sub-members was a California citizen and withdrew its notice of removal.
Because the parties were not diverse, the court concluded that it lacked authority over the case and remanded it to San Mateo County Superior Court. Judge Jacquelyn Corley issued the order on September 4, 2024.
The detailed version
- Craft v. Longs Drug Stores California, L.L.C. · No. 3:24-cv-04596
- Jacquelyn Corley
- Sept. 4, 2024
Background
Longs removed the action from San Mateo County Superior Court based on diversity jurisdiction, asserting that Cynthia Craft and Longs were citizens of different states. Federal law generally bars removal based on diversity jurisdiction when a properly joined and served defendant is a citizen of the state where the action was filed.
Longs’s removal notice did not allege the citizenship of co-defendant Bay Hill. The court therefore ordered Longs to file supplemental information identifying the citizenship of Bay Hill’s members. Longs first responded that it did not believe any Bay Hill member was a California citizen, based on a California Secretary of State filing and discussions with Bay Hill’s counsel. The court found that response insufficient and ordered Longs to provide the citizenship of all relevant members of all defendants.
Ruling
Longs’s second response stated that one of Bay Hill’s sub-members was a California citizen. Longs acknowledged that there was no diversity jurisdiction and withdrew its notice of removal.
The court concluded that, without diversity jurisdiction, it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the action. It remanded the case to San Mateo County Superior Court. The opinion does not state the underlying claims in the action.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.