Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

LEDERMAN v. MARRIOTT CORP.

October 15, 1993

LISA LEDERMAN, Plaintiff,
v.
MARRIOTT CORPORATION d/b/a THE WESTCHESTER MARRIOTT HOTEL, and various unnamed parties, Defendants.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: VINCENT L. BRODERICK

 VINCENT L. BRODERICK, U.S.D.J.

 I

 This tragic case involves the rape on January 7, 1990 of a customer of a bar maintained in a Marriott Corporation ("Marriott") hotel in Westchester. Insofar as can now be ascertained, plaintiff visited the bar and accompanied a former employee of Marriott to the hotel parking lot, leading to subsequent assault, robbery and rape. *fn1"

 At this preliminary stage, the case presents several procedural issues involving the administration of the diversity of citizenship jurisdiction of the federal courts under 28 USC § 1332 and the removal provisions of 28 USC §§ 1441 and 1447.

 Plaintiff, a resident of Rockland County, New York, filed this suit on December 23, 1992 against Marriott and numerous unnamed parties in New York State Supreme Court, New York County. Marriott, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Bethesda, Maryland, filed a notice of removal to this court pursuant to 28 USC § 1441, based on diversity of citizenship (28 USC § 1332).

 Plaintiff has moved (1) to add previously unnamed "Doe" parties as defendants, *fn2" and (2) to remand this suit to state court pursuant to 28 USC § 1447 on the ground that diversity of citizenship no longer exists inasmuch as the "Doe" defendants now identified by plaintiff are, like plaintiff, New York domiciliaries.

 Marriott has cross-moved to dismiss plaintiff's fifth claim (for negligent supervision of the premises). I deny plaintiff's motions to add further parties and to remand this case to state court, and likewise deny Marriott's motion to dismiss plaintiff's fifth claim. *fn3"

 II

 So-called "Doe" defendants are disregarded for purposes of determining diversity of citizenship jurisdiction under 28 USC § 1332 in cases removed to United States district courts pursuant to 28 USC § 1441. The removal statute provides:

 28 USC § 1441(a).

 Where a plaintiff seeks to add parties whose presence would destroy diversity and require remand, 28 USC § 1447(e) leaves the question of whether to allow the addition to the discretion of the court:

 
If after removal the plaintiff seeks to join additional defendants whose joinder would destroy subject matter jurisdiction, the court may deny joinder, or permit ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.