Ferrer v. Westchester Saving People
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:25-cv-01703
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Ferrer v. Westchester Saving People, Judge Kaplan ordered an amended removal notice to establish diversity jurisdiction or remand the case.
The parties to the removed action, particularly the party responsible for filing the notice of removal, because the court required an amended notice addressing the jurisdictional allegations.
What happened
In Ferrer v. Westchester Saving People, the court reviewed a notice removing the case to federal court. The notice invoked federal jurisdiction based on the parties’ citizenship and removal law.
The court said the notice did not adequately allege the facts needed to establish subject-matter jurisdiction. It identified possible gaps involving the citizenship of individuals, corporations, partnerships, and the nature and citizenship of defendant entities.
Judge Kaplan gave the filer until March 10, 2025, to submit an amended notice adequately alleging subject-matter jurisdiction. If that did not happen, the court said the action would be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- Ferrer v. Westchester Saving People · No. 1:25-cv-01703
- Lewis Kaplan
- Feb. 28, 2025
Background
The opinion is an order concerning removal of the action to federal court. The notice of removal invoked jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441. Section 1332 generally concerns federal jurisdiction based on the parties’ citizenship, and Section 1441 concerns removal from state court to federal court.
Jurisdictional Deficiencies
The court held that the notice of removal failed adequately to allege the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court identified several possible deficiencies, including inadequate allegations about:
- the citizenship of one or more natural persons; - the citizenship of one or more corporations; - the citizenship of one or more partnerships; and - the exact nature and citizenship of one or more defendant entities.
The order cited federal decisions and 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1) in discussing these requirements.
Order
The court gave until March 10, 2025, to file an amended notice of removal adequately alleging the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court stated that, absent that filing, the action would be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order did not otherwise decide the parties’ underlying claims.
Judge
The order was signed by Lewis A. Kaplan, United States District Judge.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.