Richmond et al v. National Gypsum Services Company et al, No. 2:2018cv07453 - Document 26 (E.D. La. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS denying 19 Request/Statement of Oral Argument filed by Cedric Richmond, Raquel Richmond on the Motion to Remand. Signed by Judge Martin L.C. Feldman on 9/10/2018.(clc)

Download PDF
Richmond et al v. National Gypsum Services Company et al Doc. 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA CEDRIC RICHMOND AND RAQUEL RICHMOND CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 18-7453 NATIONAL GYPSUM SERVICES COMPANY, ET AL. SECTION "F" ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is the plaintiffs’ request for oral argument on their motion to remand, which submission on October 3, 2018. is presently noticed for The request is DENIED for the following reasons. It is the Court’s policy to grant oral argument on motions if one of the following factors is present: 1. There is a need for an evidentiary hearing. 2. The motion or opposition papers involve a novel or complex issue of law that is unsettled. 3. The motion or opposition papers argue for a change in existing law. 4. The motion or opposition papers implicate a constitutional issue. 5. The case itself is of widespread community interest. 1 Dockets.Justia.com Because the plaintiffs’ motion to remand does not involve any of the above factors, IT IS ORDERED: that the plaintiffs’ request for oral argument is DENIED. 1 New Orleans, Louisiana, September 10, 2018 ______________________________ MARTIN L. C. FELDMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE In support of their request for oral argument, the plaintiffs allege that their motion to remand raises complex issues. However, the issues raised in the motion -- whether the allegations satisfy the jurisdictional amount in controversy required for this Court to exercise diversity jurisdiction and whether the in-state defendant was fraudulently joined -- are not sufficiently complex to justify oral argument. 2 1

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.