Tolosa v. Kensington Redwood City LLC
- Maxine Chesney
- 3:21-cv-05564
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Tolosa v. Kensington Redwood City LLC, Judge Chesney postponed deciding remand, ordered jurisdictional briefs, and continued case-management proceedings over uncertain citizenship.
Emily Tolosa, Kensington Senior Living, LLC, Kensington Redwood City LLC, and the proposed class were affected by the continued remand proceedings and supplemental briefing schedule.
What happened
In Tolosa v. Kensington Redwood City LLC, Emily Tolosa asked the federal court to send her state-law employment class action back to state court. Kensington Senior Living, LLC relied on the Class Action Fairness Act, which can provide federal jurisdiction when the amount at issue exceeds $5 million and the parties have at least minimal diversity of citizenship.
The court identified two apparent gaps in the jurisdictional showing: Kensington Redwood City LLC's citizenship was not established, and Kensington Senior Living, LLC did not identify the state where it has its principal place of business. The court allowed Kensington Senior Living, LLC to file a supplemental brief by October 1, 2021, and Tolosa to respond by October 15, 2021.
Judge Maxine Chesney did not decide the motion to remand. She continued the hearing to November 5, 2021, and continued the case-management conference; the case-management statement was due December 3, 2021.
The detailed version
- Tolosa v. Kensington Redwood City LLC · No. 3:21-cv-05564
- Maxine Chesney
- Sept. 21, 2021
Background
Emily Tolosa brought state-law employment claims arising from her work for Kensington Senior Living, LLC ("KSL") and Kensington Redwood City LLC ("KRC") at a senior care facility in San Mateo, California. She sought to proceed both individually and on behalf of a proposed class. The opinion identifies Tolosa as the plaintiff and KSL and KRC as defendants.
Tolosa filed a motion to remand, asking the federal court to return the case to state court. KSL opposed the motion, and Tolosa replied.
Jurisdictional issue
KSL removed the case from state court, asserting jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). Under CAFA, federal jurisdiction over a class action generally requires more than $5 million in controversy and minimal diversity of citizenship.
The court concluded that the parties' filings did not adequately address diversity of citizenship. First, KSL had not shown KRC's citizenship. The court explained that diversity is determined from the citizenship of the named parties, not whether a party had been served. Second, although KSL stated that it was organized under Virginia law, it did not identify the state where it has its principal place of business, which the court said is required to determine an unincorporated association's citizenship for CAFA purposes.
Order
The court afforded the parties leave to file supplemental briefs limited to diversity of citizenship. KSL could file a brief of no more than five pages, excluding exhibits, by October 1, 2021. Tolosa could file a responsive brief of no more than five pages, excluding exhibits, by October 15, 2021.
The court continued the hearing on Tolosa's motion to remand to November 5, 2021, at 9:00 a.m. It also continued the case-management conference and required the case-management statement to be filed by December 3, 2021. The opinion did not grant or deny the motion to remand.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.