Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Apr. 23, 2024

Cuccia v. HF Management Services, LLC

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:24-cv-02091
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Cuccia v. HF Management Services, Judge Cronan ordered HF Management Services to respond by April 30 to Cuccia’s remand motion.

Who this affects

Heather Cuccia, HF Management Services LLC, and Genesis Bayuelo-Perri; the order set a response deadline for HF Management Services and did not resolve whether the case would remain in federal court.

What happened

In Cuccia v. HF Management Services, Heather Cuccia asked the federal court to send her employment-discrimination case back to New York state court. She argued that the defendants filed their notice of removal too late.

Cuccia said Genesis Bayuelo-Perri was served on November 16, 2023, and HF Management Services was served through New York’s Secretary of State on December 1, 2023. The defendants removed the case to federal court on March 20, 2024. Cuccia also asked the court, at minimum, to investigate HF’s claim that it did not receive the pleadings until March 13, 2024.

The court did not decide the remand motion in this order. Judge John P. Cronan ordered HF Management Services to respond by April 30, 2024.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Cuccia v. HF Management Services, LLC · No. 1:24-cv-02091
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Apr. 23, 2024

Background

Heather Cuccia filed an employment-discrimination action in New York State Supreme Court. The defendants removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on March 20, 2024. Cuccia then filed a letter motion asking the federal court to remand, or return, the case to state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).

Cuccia’s position

Cuccia argued that the notice of removal was untimely under the federal removal statute. She stated that Genesis Bayuelo-Perri was served on November 16, 2023, and that HF Management Services LLC was served through the New York Secretary of State on December 1, 2023. Cuccia maintained that HF’s notice of removal was filed more than three months later.

Cuccia acknowledged that courts in the federal district generally calculate the removal period from the defendant’s receipt of the initial pleading, rather than from the statutory agent’s receipt. She argued, however, that HF’s claim that it never received the pleadings was unsupported and unreasonable because the pleadings had allegedly been mailed multiple times to HF’s registered address. She alternatively asked the court to find that HF received notice by mid-December 2023 or to order an inquiry into HF’s claimed nonreceipt.

Order

The April 23 order did not grant or deny the motion to remand and did not decide whether removal was timely. It ordered: “HF Management Services shall respond by April 30, 2024.” Judge John P. Cronan signed the order.

Disposition

The order sets a response deadline and leaves the remand motion unresolved.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.