Mumfrey-Martin v. Stolthaven New Orleans, LLC
2:12-cv-02539
| E.D. La. | Sep 10, 2013Background
- Three related suits arising from a chemical spill at Stolthaven Braithwaite facility during Hurricane Isaac; consolidated in this court; removal on diversity grounds under 28 U.S.C. §1332(a).
- Plaintiffs Shaffer (12-2543), Duhy (12-2546), and Martin (12-2539) each sue Stolthaven; Watt and Plaquemine Parish are defendants in some cases and are Louisiana residents.
- Stolthaven is an LLC whose sole member is Stolt-Nielsen USA Inc. (Delaware); thus Stolthaven is a Delaware/Connecticut citizen for purposes of §1332(a).
- CAFA does not alter the traditional rule that an LLC’s citizenship is that of its members; thus complete diversity depends on all parties being citizens of different states for §1332(a) actions removed to federal court.
- In 12-2543, Shaffer Plaintiffs allege Watt had a personal, delegated duty related to hurricane preparedness, and Watt’s inclusion defeats diversity; the court finds Watt properly joined and remand is required for 12-2543.
- In 12-2546, Duhy Plaintiffs allege Plaquemine Parish conducted inequitable levee management; defendants argue RS 9:2798.1 immunity but factual questions remain; Parish properly joined, remand required for 12-2546.
- In 12-2539, Martin Plaintiffs allege damages in excess of $75,000; defendants show facially apparent amount in controversy; plaintiffs’ binding affidavits are not binding, so removal was proper and remand denied for 12-2539.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is there complete diversity for 12-2543 and 12-2546? | Plaintiffs claim CAFA treats Stolthaven as Louisiana citizen. | CAFA; Stolthaven not Louisiana citizen; diversity lacking. | No complete diversity; remand granted for 12-2543 and 12-2546. |
| Is Watt improperly joined in 12-2543? | Watt had a personal, delegated duty; can state a claim under Canter. | Watt’s role is a general administrative duty; not a personal duty. | Shaffer’s Canter claim suffices; Watt properly joined; remand denied for 12-2543 due to lack of complete diversity. |
| Does RS 2798.1 immunity bar 12-2546? | Parish immunity applies to discretionary acts. | Immunity may apply; depends on record evidence. | Immunity not established at pleading stage; Parish properly joined; remand granted for 12-2546. |
| Is the amount in controversy satisfied for 12-2539? | Complaint facially seeks >$75,000; removal appropriate. | Facially apparent amount >$75,000; post-removal affidavits insufficient; removal proper; remand denied for 12-2539. |
Key Cases Cited
- McLaughlin v. Mississippi Power Co., 376 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2004) (complete diversity requires citizenship on both sides; LLC citizenship by members)
- Harvey v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co., 542 F.3d 1077 (5th Cir. 2008) (LLC citizenship determined by members; CAFA does not replace §1332(a))
- Smallwood v. Illinois Central R.R. Co., 385 F.3d 568 (5th Cir. 2004) (improper joinder standard; burden on removing party)
- In re 1994 Exxon Chemical Fire, 558 F.3d 378 (5th Cir. 2009) (two methods to test viability of claims against in-state defendants; 12(b)(6) or piercing pleadings)
- Manguno v. Prudential Prop. And Cas. Ins. Co., 276 F.3d 720 (5th Cir. 2002) (burden to show amount in controversy exceeds $75,000; preponderance standard)
- Allen v. R & H Oil & Gas Co., 63 F.3d 1326 (5th Cir. 1995) (burden shifting on amount in controversy; facial or summary evidence may suffice)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombley, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading standard for plausibility; used in determining state-law claims in removal context)
- Re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation, 696 F.3d 436 (5th Cir. 2012) (FTCA-like discretionary immunity considerations for public entities; context of policy decisions)