Newton Rapplean, et al. v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division · May 1, 2026 · No. 4:26-cv-00650-MTS

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri reviewed a notice of removal filed by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company and found that it failed to establish complete diversity of citizenship as of the time the state-court action was commenced. The court ordered Defendant to file an amended notice of removal establishing subject-matter jurisdiction and to attach official copies of the state-court petition and its attachment, warning that failure to do so would result in remand.

Holdings

  1. A removing defendant must establish that the parties were diverse both when the plaintiff commenced the action in state court and when the defendant filed the notice of removal; because Nationwide alleged neither the parties' citizenship at commencement nor the required diversity at that time, the notice of removal was jurisdictionally deficient.
  2. If Nationwide can establish subject matter jurisdiction, it must file an amended notice of removal addressing the jurisdictional defect and attach an official copy of the plaintiff's petition and its attachment; failure to establish jurisdiction will result in remand.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the notice of removal adequately established complete diversity of citizenship at both the commencement of the state-court action and the time of removal.
  2. Whether the removing defendant complied with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) by attaching the required official copies of the state-court process, pleadings, and orders.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (5)

  • Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 94 (2010)(followed)
  • Chavez-Lavagnino v. Motivation Educ. Training, Inc., 714 F.3d 1055, 1056 (8th Cir. 2013)(followed)
  • Reece v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 760 F.3d 771, 777 (8th Cir. 2014)(followed)
  • Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Pechner, 95 U.S. 183, 186 (1877)(followed)
  • City of St. Louis v. Bindan Corp., 295 F.R.D. 392, 395 (E.D. Mo. 2013)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…