Feliciano v. Wayne Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation LLC
- Analisa Torres
- 1:22-cv-05626
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Feliciano v. Wayne Center, Judge Torres remanded this state-law nursing-home case after finding no federal jurisdiction.
The ruling returned Edwin Feliciano’s estate-related action against Wayne Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation LLC to Supreme Court, Bronx County; it also closed the federal case.
What happened
In Feliciano v. Wayne Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation LLC, Edwin Feliciano, administrator of Amalia Feliciano’s estate, brought state-law claims involving nursing-home malpractice, wrongful death, pain and suffering, negligence, and gross negligence. Wayne Center removed the case from Bronx County Supreme Court to federal court, arguing that federal law applied.
Feliciano asked the federal court to send the case back to state court. Wayne Center argued that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, federal-officer removal rules, and an important federal-question doctrine supported federal jurisdiction. The court rejected those arguments, finding that the claims were based on New York law and that Wayne Center had not shown a valid basis for federal jurisdiction.
The court granted Feliciano’s motion to remand, sent the action back to Supreme Court, Bronx County, and closed the federal case. Judge Analisa Torres also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the remand motion.
The detailed version
- Feliciano v. Wayne Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation LLC · No. 1:22-cv-05626
- Analisa Torres
- Nov. 2, 2022
Background
Edwin Feliciano, as administrator of the estate of Amalia Feliciano, sued Wayne Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation LLC, doing business as Wayne Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation, in Supreme Court, Bronx County. The complaint asserted nursing-home malpractice, wrongful death, pain and suffering, negligence, and gross negligence under New York law. ABC Corporation and ABC Partnership were also named as fictitious defendants because their identities and legal names were unknown to Feliciano.
Wayne Center removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. It argued that the claims raised federal questions under federal jurisdiction statutes, that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act completely displaced the state-law claims, that Wayne Center was acting under a federal officer, and that the claims necessarily raised an important federal issue. The opinion states that the parties were not diverse, and Wayne Center conceded that point.
Motion to Remand
Feliciano moved to remand, meaning to return the case to the state court where it was filed. The court explained that the party removing a case bears the burden of showing that federal jurisdiction is proper and that doubts about removal are generally resolved against federal jurisdiction.
The court held that Feliciano’s claims were state-law claims and did not arise under federal law. It agreed with federal courts that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act did not completely preempt state-law claims arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. The court also found that Wayne Center had not shown it was acting under a federal officer. In the court’s view, Wayne Center’s assertion that it followed federal directives and regulations was insufficient. Finally, the court held that the federal-question doctrine identified by Wayne Center did not support removal because the state-law claims did not necessarily raise a substantial federal issue.
Ruling
The court concluded that none of Feliciano’s claims were removable and that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Judge Analisa Torres granted Feliciano’s motion to remand. The matter was remanded to Supreme Court, Bronx County; the Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 11 and close the federal case.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.