Gomez v. Dormont Manufacturing Company

Background

Socorro Gomez, Fernando Arellano, and Martha Guadalupe Lopez Trinidad sued Dormont Manufacturing Company and 148-150 Westchester Avenue, LLC in Supreme Court, Westchester County. They alleged that a stainless-steel gas connector designed or supplied by Dormont failed, releasing gas that ignited inside a rental property owned by 148-150 Westchester and injured them.

The plaintiffs asserted negligence, breach of warranty, and strict products liability claims against Dormont. They asserted a separate negligence claim against 148-150 Westchester based on allegedly unsafe conditions at the property.

Dormont previously removed the case to federal court, but the case was remanded because Dormont had not shown that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000. Dormont later removed the case again, arguing that the plaintiffs had fraudulently joined 148-150 Westchester solely to defeat federal diversity jurisdiction and did not actually intend to recover from it. 148-150 Westchester joined the plaintiffs’ motion to remand.

Motion to Remand

Federal diversity jurisdiction generally requires an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000 and complete diversity of citizenship between the parties. The opinion states that Gomez and 148-150 Westchester were both New York citizens. Because complete diversity did not exist, the court considered whether 148-150 Westchester had been fraudulently joined.

To establish fraudulent joinder, Dormont had to provide clear and convincing evidence either that the plaintiffs had committed outright fraud in their pleadings or that there was no possibility that they could state a claim against 148-150 Westchester in state court. The court emphasized that it should not decide the merits of the claim at this stage and that doubts should be resolved in favor of remand.

The court rejected Dormont’s argument that the plaintiffs had asserted only an unviable product-liability claim against 148-150 Westchester. The complaint alleged that 148-150 Westchester owned the property and allowed it to remain in an unsafe, defective, and dangerous condition. The court determined that these allegations supported a possible premises-liability negligence claim. Because the plaintiffs’ product-related claims were asserted only against Dormont, Dormont did not meet its burden to prove fraudulent joinder.

Costs and Expenses

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), a court may require the removing party to pay costs and actual expenses, including attorney’s fees, resulting from removal. The relevant standard is whether the removal had an objectively reasonable basis; bad faith is not required.

The court found that Dormont lacked an objectively reasonable basis for removing the case. It also noted that Dormont failed to file a required Civil Cover Sheet after the second removal and did not tell the clerk that the case had previously been assigned to Judge Philip M. Halpern and remanded. The court stated that these circumstances suggested Dormont sought a more favorable discovery forum and a different judge, conduct it described as improper forum and judge shopping.

Disposition

The court granted the motion to remand and remanded the case to Supreme Court, Westchester County. It ordered Dormont Manufacturing Company to pay $2,500 to the plaintiffs and $1,000 to 148-150 Westchester Avenue, LLC by February 22, 2022. The clerk was instructed to terminate the motion, remand the case, and close the federal case.