Raymond v. Dias de Araujo

Background

Wendy Raymond filed a personal-injury action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Rockland County, against Geovanes Dias de Araujo and ES Express Transport Inc. She alleged that Dias de Araujo negligently operated a vehicle while acting within the scope of his employment with ES Express Transport Inc. The defendants removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under the federal diversity-jurisdiction statute.

Raymond moved to remand, meaning to return the case to state court. She argued that the filings referred to the parties’ residences rather than their legal citizenship or domiciles, that the filings were unclear about ES Express Transport Inc.’s citizenship, and that the defendants had not shown that more than $75,000 was at stake. The defendants opposed the motion and argued that New York was Raymond’s domicile, that they were Massachusetts citizens, and that Raymond’s written $1 million settlement demand established the required amount in controversy. The defendants also alternatively requested limited discovery on citizenship and the amount in controversy.

Diversity of Citizenship

Federal diversity jurisdiction requires complete diversity between the parties and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000, excluding interest and costs. A person’s citizenship for this purpose depends on domicile, not merely residence.

The complaint described Raymond as a resident of New York, and the defendants submitted evidence that she had a New York driver’s license and New York address on the date of the accident. The court nevertheless held that the defendants had not sufficiently established that Raymond was a New York citizen.

The complaint described Dias de Araujo as a resident of Massachusetts. The defendants submitted evidence that he had a Massachusetts driver’s license and hearsay, third-party evidence that he had lived and worked only in Massachusetts since immigrating to the United States in 2001. The court held that the defendants had not sufficiently established that Dias de Araujo was a Massachusetts citizen.

The complaint and answer gave conflicting information about ES Express Transport Inc. The court found that an affidavit from the company’s vice president resolved the confusion by confirming that the company was incorporated in Massachusetts and had its principal place of business there. The court therefore found that ES Express Transport Inc. was a Massachusetts citizen. Because the defendants had not established the citizenship of Raymond and Dias de Araujo, however, complete diversity had not been established.

Amount in Controversy

The complaint did not state a specific damages amount because New York law does not require a personal-injury complaint to specify the amount sought. It stated only that Raymond’s damages exceeded the jurisdiction of the lower courts.

The defendants relied on Raymond’s written settlement demand for $1 million and a civil cover sheet listing a $1 million demand. The court held that a written settlement demand may establish the amount in controversy and found no indication that Raymond’s demand was made in bad faith. The defendants therefore met their burden of showing that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.

Ruling and Disposition

Judge Halpern granted Raymond’s motion to remand. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at Document 8 and remand the case to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Rockland County. The court also denied the defendants’ alternative request for limited discovery concerning citizenship and the amount in controversy. The opinion addressed federal jurisdiction and remand; it did not decide the merits of Raymond’s personal-injury claims.