Beter v. Baughman
- Gregory Woods
- 1:24-cv-00079
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Beter v. Baughman, Judge Woods denied Beter’s motion to remand after adopting a magistrate judge’s recommendation that removal was proper.
Petra Christina Beter and Duane Baughman, along with the other named defendants; the motion to return the case from federal court was denied.
What happened
In Beter v. Baughman, Magistrate Judge Robyn Tarnofsky recommended denying Petra Christina Beter’s request to send the case back from federal court, provided Duane Baughman filed an amended removal notice. The recommendation addressed diversity jurisdiction, the amount in controversy, and Beter’s arguments about removal rules.
Baughman filed the amended notice on March 18, 2024, describing the basis for diversity jurisdiction and the amount in controversy. No party filed a timely objection to the recommendation. The district court reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Gregory Woods accepted and adopted the recommendation in full and denied Beter’s motion to remand. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion listed at docket number 12.
The detailed version
- Beter v. Baughman · No. 1:24-cv-00079
- Gregory Woods
- Mar. 28, 2024
Background
Petra Christina Beter asked the court to remand, meaning return, the case from federal court. Magistrate Judge Robyn Tarnofsky issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the motion be denied if Duane Baughman filed an amended notice of removal establishing diversity jurisdiction and the amount in controversy. The recommendation rejected Beter’s arguments that the forum-defendant rule and unanimity rule barred removal and concluded that removal was proper except for technical defects in the original notice.
Baughman filed an amended notice of removal on March 18, 2024. The amended notice described the basis for diversity jurisdiction and the amount in controversy.
Review of the Recommendation
The district court explained that it could accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s recommendation. Because no party filed a timely objection, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. It found no clear error.
Ruling
Judge Gregory H. Woods accepted and adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. For the reasons stated in that recommendation, the court denied Beter’s motion to remand. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion pending at docket number 12.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.