Cartagena v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc.

Background

Carlos Cartagena filed the action in New York Supreme Court, Bronx County, after an accident in which he alleged that a truck struck him while he was operating an electric bike. The truck operator left the scene, and the New York City Police Department could not locate him. Cartagena sued Ryder Truck Rental, Tomra of North America, and the unidentified operator, whom he called “John Doe.”

Cartagena later demanded the operator’s name and last-known address. Defendants disclosed that “John Doe” was “Mr. Perez,” but did not initially provide his full name or address. Defendants removed the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, and the full name and address of the operator—Hector Perez—were later disclosed. The opinion states that Perez is a New York resident.

Substitution and Amendment

Cartagena moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(c) to substitute Hector Perez for “John Doe.” The court explained that Rule 25(c) applies when a party transfers a legal interest to another party. Because “John Doe” was only a placeholder for the unidentified truck operator, no transfer of interest had occurred.

The court therefore treated the motion as a request for leave to amend the complaint under Rule 15(a)(2). The court granted leave to replace “John Doe” with Hector Perez, reasoning that Cartagena had requested Perez’s identity before removal and that defendants had not provided the information before filing the notice of removal. The court also rejected defendants’ argument that Perez was not a necessary party and was being added for tactical reasons. The court stated that, as the driver, Perez was likely a necessary party and was at least an appropriate party, and it found no gamesmanship by Cartagena.

Jurisdiction and Disposition

After Perez was named, the court concluded that diversity jurisdiction was destroyed. Although federal law generally disregards fictitious defendants when determining whether a case was removable based on diversity, the court treated Perez’s post-removal addition as the joinder of a nondiverse defendant under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e). That provision allows a federal court either to deny the joinder or to permit it and remand the case to state court.

The court concluded that remand was warranted because Cartagena had adequately identified the Doe defendant, defendants were better positioned to determine the operator’s identity and citizenship, and Perez was an agent of a company. The court granted Cartagena’s motion to substitute Hector Perez for “John Doe,” deemed the complaint amended, and ordered the case remanded to New York Supreme Court, Bronx County. The Clerk was directed to close the motion and carry out the remand.