Henry v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:21-cv-01801
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Henry v. Delta Air Lines, Judge Schofield remanded the case because diversity removal violated the rule barring in-state defendants.
Rose Marie Sainte Henry, Delta Air Lines, Inc., and The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey; the case was returned to the New York state court where it was filed.
What happened
Henry v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. was removed from New York state court by Delta Air Lines and the Port Authority based on diversity jurisdiction.
The federal court found the removal notice deficient because it did not state the Port Authority’s citizenship. The court determined that the Port Authority was a New York citizen and had been properly joined and served as a defendant.
Judge Schofield ruled that removal was improper under federal law and remanded the case to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Bronx.
The detailed version
- Henry v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-01801
- Lorna Schofield
- Mar. 4, 2021
Background
The case was originally filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Bronx. Delta Air Lines, Inc. and The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey removed it to federal court, relying on diversity jurisdiction, which can allow a federal court to hear certain disputes involving citizens of different states.
Why the Court Found Removal Improper
Federal law generally bars removal based solely on diversity jurisdiction when any properly joined and served defendant is a citizen of the state where the case was filed. The parties did not dispute that Delta and the Port Authority had been properly joined and served.
The defendants’ removal notice did not state the Port Authority’s citizenship. The court relied on the Port Authority’s answer, which stated that it had its principal place of business in New York. The court therefore determined that the Port Authority was a citizen of New York for removal purposes. Delta argued that the Port Authority was not a proper defendant because it had no duty concerning the subject of the lawsuit, but Delta identified no applicable exception to the removal rule.
Ruling
Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered that removal was improper under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2). The court remanded the case to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Bronx. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.