Dalraida Properties, Inc. et al v. Elastikote, LLC et al (Joint Assign)(MAG+), No. 2:2014cv01213 - Document 20 (M.D. Ala. 2015)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: It is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that: (1) The 19 Objection is overruled. (2) The magistrate judge's 18 Recommendation is adopted. (3) The plaintiffs 13 Motion to remand is granted. (4) Pursuant to 28 U .S.C. § 1447(c), this cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to take appropriate steps to effect the remand. This case is closed in this court. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 7/15/2015. (Attachment(s) added on 7/15/2015: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist) Copy mailed to Clerk, Circuit Court of Montgomery County, AL. (dmn, )

Download PDF
Dalraida Properties, Inc. et al v. Elastikote, LLC et al (Joint Assign)(MAG+) Doc. 20 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION DALRAIDA PROPERTIES, INC., ) and PILKERTON BUILDING ) COMPANY, LLC, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) ELASTIKOTE, LLC, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14cv1213-MHT (WO) OPINION AND ORDER The this plaintiffs, lawsuit in two state Alabama court corporations, bringing filed claims, among others, for products liability, breach of express and implied warranties, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation, stemming from the purchase and use of a purportedly defendants claiming that defective removed the this court roof case has sealant. to federal diversity One of court, jurisdiction because the one defendant who would destroy diversity was fraudulently joined. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The Dockets.Justia.com plaintiffs moved to remand. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that the plaintiffs’ remand motion be granted and that the case be remanded to state court for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Also before the court is the removing defendant’s objection to the recommendation.* review of the After record, an the independent court and concludes de novo that the magistrate judge’s recommendation should be adopted. *** Accordingly, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that: (1) The objection (doc. no. 19) is overruled. (2) The magistrate judge’s recommendation (doc. no. 18) is adopted. * In the objection, the removing defendant argues for the first time that allowing a negligent misrepresentation claim to proceed against the one Alabama defendant would violate the public policy of the State of Alabama. As this argument was not raised before the magistrate judge, this court will not consider it now. 2 (3) The plaintiffs’ motion to remand (doc. no. 13) is granted. (4) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), this cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to appropriate steps to effect the remand. This case is closed in this court. DONE, this the 15th day of July, 2015. /s/ Myron H. Thompson____ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE take

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.