Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 21, 2020

Wynter v. Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC

Judge
Paul Gardephe
Docket
1:20-cv-02429
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Winter v. Victoria’s Secret: Judge Kaplan ordered an amended removal notice by April 6 or the case would be remanded.

Who this affects

Cynn Winter and the defendants, because the federal court required correction of the removal notice and stated that the case would be remanded if an adequate amended notice was not filed by April 6, 2020.

What happened

Cynn Winter sued Victoria’s Secret, Inc., and another defendant, and the action was removed to federal court under the diversity-jurisdiction statute. The court found that the notice of removal did not adequately allege subject-matter jurisdiction.

The court identified possible deficiencies involving the citizenship of individuals, corporations, partnerships, or limited liability companies, the nature and citizenship of business entities, and the timeliness of removal. The order did not decide which specific deficiency existed.

Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ordered that an amended notice of removal adequately alleging federal subject-matter jurisdiction be filed by April 6, 2020. Without that filing, the action would be remanded.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Wynter v. Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-02429
Judge
Paul Gardephe
Date
Mar. 21, 2020

Background

The opinion is an order in an action brought by Cynn Winter against Victoria’s Secret, Inc., and another defendant. The notice of removal invoked federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the statute governing diversity jurisdiction.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that the notice of removal failed adequately to allege the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order identified possible problems with allegations concerning the citizenship of one or more natural persons, corporations, partnerships, or limited liability companies. It also identified possible deficiencies concerning the nature and citizenship of business entities and whether the action was timely removed from state court. The order stated that these were possible deficiencies and did not specify which one required correction.

Disposition

The court ordered the filing of an amended notice of removal adequately alleging subject-matter jurisdiction on or before April 6, 2020. The court stated that, absent that filing, the action would be remanded. The order was signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.