Lopez v. SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Inc.

Lopez · United States District Court for the Southern District of California · August 2, 2023 · No. 23-cv-0429-L-AHG

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California denied Plaintiff Cristian Lopez’s motion to remand. The court held that removal had divested the state court of jurisdiction before Plaintiff amended the complaint to add a California defendant, so the amendment was vacated and complete diversity remained.

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Writing for the Court
H. James Lorenz
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Decision date
August 2, 2023
Docket number
23-cv-0429-L-AHG
Procedural posture
Plaintiff moved to remand a removed diversity action to San Diego Superior Court, arguing that the subsequent addition of a California defendant destroyed complete diversity.
Standard of review
The court evaluated the motion to remand and the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction under the diversity-removal statutes.
Precedential value
unknown
Parties
Cristian Lopez v. SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Inc., Does 1–100
Disposition
denied

Topics

subject matter jurisdictionfederalismcivil procedurepleadings

Practice areas

Civil procedureFederal jurisdictionRemoval and remand

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a plaintiff may amend a complaint in state court after the action has been removed to federal court.
  2. Whether a post-removal state-court amendment adding a nondiverse defendant destroys federal subject-matter jurisdiction and requires remand.

Holdings

  1. A state court loses jurisdiction over an action upon the filing of the removal petition in federal court; therefore, Lopez's March 10, 2023 amendment filed in state court after the March 8 removal was void and was vacated.
  2. Remand was not warranted because Alnwick was not a defendant in the federal action and the parties before the court remained completely diverse.

Key quotations

The removal of an action to federal court necessarily divests state and local courts of their jurisdiction over a particular dispute. (at 1)
Thus, the instant action was removed and the state court was stripped of jurisdiction on March 8, 2023, when Defendant filed the petition for removal in federal court. (at 1)

Factual background

Cristian Lopez, a California citizen, filed a complaint in San Diego Superior Court against SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Inc. SeaWorld removed the action to federal court on March 8, 2023, asserting diversity jurisdiction. Two days later, Lopez amended the complaint in state court to add Marc Alnwick, also a California citizen, as a defendant. The court concluded that the state-court amendment was made after removal and therefore could not destroy federal diversity jurisdiction.

Procedural history

Lopez filed the action in San Diego Superior Court on January 31, 2023. SeaWorld was served on February 7, 2023, and removed the action to the Southern District of California on March 8, 2023, based on diversity jurisdiction. Lopez amended the complaint in state court on March 10 to name Marc Alnwick, a California citizen, as a Doe defendant and served him on March 17; the federal court held that the amendment occurred after removal and was void because the state court had lost jurisdiction. The court denied the motion to remand.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…