Judith Lemus v. Sunrise Senior Living Management, Inc. et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California grants Judith Lemus’s motion to remand her employment-related action against Sunrise Senior Living Management, Inc. to Los Angeles Superior Court. The court holds that snap removal cannot cure the absence of complete diversity and concludes that Sunrise failed to establish diversity jurisdiction regarding the alleged California defendant.

Holdings

1. Snap removal cannot confer diversity jurisdiction where complete diversity otherwise does not exist; the forum-defendant rule in 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2) does not eliminate the separate requirement of complete diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
2. After a plaintiff challenges the jurisdictional allegations in a notice of removal, the removing defendant must prove federal diversity jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.
3. A nonmoving party's failure to address an argument raised in support of remand may be treated as waiver or abandonment of that issue.

Questions Presented

1. Whether snap removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2) can establish or preserve diversity jurisdiction when complete diversity otherwise does not exist.
2. Whether the removing defendant established complete diversity by a preponderance of the evidence after the plaintiff challenged the citizenship allegations.
3. Whether the defendant waived or abandoned its response to the plaintiff's argument that Jennifer's California citizenship defeated complete diversity.

Disposition

remanded