Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

AGOSTO v. DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC., CV 14-3467 DSF (Ex). (2014)

Court: District Court, C.D. California Number: infdco20140722550 Visitors: 13
Filed: Jul. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2014
Summary: MEMORANDUM DALE S. FISCHER, District Judge. Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order REMANDING Case This case was removed based on diversity jurisdiction. There is no question that the complaint, on its face, involves a plaintiff and a defendant who are citizens of the same state. The removing defendant, Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., claims that the non-diverse individual defendant, Robin Welcham, is fraudulently joined. Welcham is alleged to have been Plaintiff's supervisor and to have engaged in haras
More

MEMORANDUM

DALE S. FISCHER, District Judge.

Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order REMANDING Case

This case was removed based on diversity jurisdiction. There is no question that the complaint, on its face, involves a plaintiff and a defendant who are citizens of the same state. The removing defendant, Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., claims that the non-diverse individual defendant, Robin Welcham, is fraudulently joined. Welcham is alleged to have been Plaintiff's supervisor and to have engaged in harassment of Plaintiff. First, Dollar Tree claims that it has no employee named Robin Welcham. The Court finds that this does not constitute fraudulent joinder. Plaintiff alleges a harassment claim against her supervisor, who is allegedly a California citizen. That Plaintiff might not have an accurate name for her former supervisor does not mean that the supervisor is fraudulently joined. Second, Dollar Tree claims that Welcham is fraudulently joined due to Plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies. While there may be a substantial argument for dismissal on these grounds, the Court concludes that the issue is not so clear as to constitute a failure to state a claim that is "obvious according to the settled rules of the state." Morris v. Princess Cruises, Inc., 236 F.3d 1061, 1067 (9th Cir. 2001) The case is REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer