Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning subject-matter jurisdiction over state medical malpractice claims. Because the plaintiff failed to allege that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, the court dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice and directed the clerk to close the case.
Holdings
- The court held that independent diversity jurisdiction was not established because Plaintiff failed to allege that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, and therefore dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
- The court held that, absent a specific and timely objection, it was required to review the recommendation for clear error and, finding none, adopted the recommendation as its own.
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should adopt the magistrate judge's recommendation that independent diversity jurisdiction was lacking because Plaintiff failed to allege an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000.
- What standard of review applies to the magistrate judge's Memorandum and Recommendation in the absence of a specific and timely objection.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (2)
- Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 271 (1976)(followed)
- Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…