Saus v. E D C Transportation L L C
3:25-cv-00130
W.D. La.May 5, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs John Arthur Saus and Bonna Saus filed a lawsuit in Louisiana state court against EDC Transportation, L.L.C. (EDC), Arturo Guadalupe, and an insurance entity named MS Transverse Specialty Insurance Company.
- Defendants removed the case to federal court claiming diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, which requires complete diversity between parties and an amount in controversy over $75,000.
- The court identified deficiencies in the notice of removal regarding the allegations of citizenship for individual and entity parties.
- The court questioned whether the defendants properly alleged the amount in controversy and whether the parties are correctly identified (e.g., potential confusion between Traverse and Transverse as proper party-defendant).
- The removing parties were given 7 days to cure citizenship deficiencies and 14 days to provide evidence about the amount in controversy.
- If the jurisdictional prerequisites are not established, remand to state court will be recommended.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Citizenship of Individual Plaintiffs | Saus alleges Louisiana residency | Removal based on plaintiffs' place of residence | Domicile, not residence, is required; more facts needed |
| Proper Identification of Insurance Company | Plaintiffs sued MS Transverse | Notice of removal refers to Traverse, a non-party | Clarification/substitution or proper citizenship required |
| EDC’s Entity Status and Citizenship Allegations | Not specified | EDC alleged as Texas corporation but labeled as LLC | Must clarify entity type and allege/trace proper citizenship |
| Amount in Controversy Exceeds $75,000 | Plaintiffs seek damages in excess for both | Defendants interpret as meeting $75,000 threshold | Must show one plaintiff individually meets threshold with evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Howery v. Allstate Ins. Co., 243 F.3d 912 (5th Cir. 2001) (party seeking removal must prove federal jurisdiction)
- Getty Oil Co. v. Ins. Co. of North America, 841 F.2d 1254 (5th Cir. 1988) (citizenship must be distinctly and affirmatively alleged for diversity)
- Mas v. Perry, 489 F.2d 1396 (5th Cir. 1974) (domicile, not residence, determines citizenship for diversity)
- Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989) (distinguishes domicile from residence)
- Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, 574 U.S. 81 (2014) (amount in controversy can be alleged by defendant if not contested)
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546 (2005) (each plaintiff's claim must individually meet amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction)
- Harvey v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co., 542 F.3d 1077 (5th Cir. 2008) (LLC citizenship based on members' citizenship)