Saludares v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:23-cv-02325
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Saludares v. Costco, Judge Chhabria granted remand because Costco did not show the Doe employees were improperly added to defeat federal jurisdiction.
Myra Saludares and Costco Wholesale Corporation are affected because the case was returned from federal court to Santa Clara County Superior Court. The ruling did not decide liability or the merits of Saludares’s claims.
What happened
In Saludares v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, Myra Saludares asked the federal court to return her case to state court. Costco had removed the case to federal court, arguing that two unnamed employees, Juan A. and Jesus Doe, had been improperly included.
The court found that Saludares alleged more than that the employees were merely present: she alleged that an employee placed a pallet jack behind her without warning, causing her fall. Costco also did not provide evidence that the employees were uninvolved or that they were citizens of another state.
Judge Vince Chhabria granted Saludares’s motion to remand and directed the Clerk to return the case to Santa Clara County Superior Court. The opinion did not decide whether Saludares will ultimately win her claims.
The detailed version
- Saludares v. Costco Wholesale Corporation · No. 3:23-cv-02325
- Vince Chhabria
- Aug. 4, 2023
Background
Myra Saludares sued Costco Wholesale Corporation and two employees identified as Juan A. and Jesus Doe. Costco removed the case to federal court. Saludares moved to remand, meaning she asked the federal court to return the case to state court.
Reasoning
The court held that Costco did not meet its heavy burden to show that Juan A. and Jesus Doe were fraudulently joined. Fraudulent joinder is a doctrine that can allow a federal court to disregard a party when the plaintiff has no possible claim against that party and cannot fix the problem by amending the complaint.
Costco argued that the employees could not be liable because they were merely present when the accident occurred. The court found that Saludares alleged more than mere presence. She alleged that an employee placed a pallet jack behind her and failed to warn her, causing her to fall. Saludares also stated that Jesus Doe was involved in the incident and submitted an incident report supporting that statement.
Costco further argued that Saludares’s inability to provide the employees’ full names and addresses supported fraudulent joinder. The court rejected that argument, explaining that Costco had the responsibility to show that federal jurisdiction existed. Costco could have submitted evidence that the employees were not involved or were citizens of another state, but it did not do so.
The court also addressed the rule that unnamed Doe defendants generally are not considered when determining diversity jurisdiction. It explained that the rule does not apply when a plaintiff identifies a particular person, describes specific conduct by that person, and merely does not yet know the person’s true name. The court noted that Saludares had repeatedly asked Costco for information about the employees identified in the incident report, without success.
Disposition
The court granted the motion to remand. The Clerk was ordered to remand the case to Santa Clara County Superior Court. The court did not decide the merits of Saludares’s claims or determine whether Costco or the employees were liable for her fall.
Judge Vince Chhabria signed the order on August 4, 2023.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.