Pinedo-Coral v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc.
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:20-cv-01692
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Pinedo-Coral v. Ryder Truck Rental, Judge Kaplan ordered an amended removal notice or remand for inadequate jurisdictional allegations.
Pinedo-Coral, Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., the other named defendant, and the parties to the removed action.
What happened
Pinedo-Coral v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. involves a case removed from state court to federal court under the diversity-jurisdiction statute. The order does not describe the underlying dispute.
The court found that the removal notice did not adequately allege facts showing federal subject-matter jurisdiction, including the citizenship of one or more natural persons. It also identified possible deficiencies involving business entities or the timeliness of removal.
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ordered that an amended removal notice adequately alleging jurisdiction be filed by March 18, 2020; otherwise, the action would be remanded.
The detailed version
- Pinedo-Coral v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-01692
- Lewis Kaplan
- Mar. 9, 2020
Background
Rielmer Pinedo-Coral brought this action against Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., and another defendant. The defendants removed the action from state court, invoking federal diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or dispute.
Jurisdictional problem
The court held that the notice of removal failed adequately to allege the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order specifically identifies inadequate allegations concerning the citizenship of one or more natural persons. It also lists possible deficiencies concerning the citizenship or nature of business entities and the timely removal of the action from state court. The order's formatting does not clearly show which of those additional listed issues the court found deficient.
Ruling
The court ordered that an amended notice of removal adequately alleging subject-matter jurisdiction be filed on or before March 18, 2020. If no adequate amended notice was filed by that date, the action would be remanded. The court did not decide the merits of the underlying claims. Judge Lewis A. Kaplan entered the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.