Summary
finding removal period not triggered by plaintiff's discovery responses because "[d]efendants would be required to speculate or conduct their own additional investigation, as highlighted by the competing 'quantum' cases submitted by both parties, to determine whether the amount in controversy requirement was satisfied based upon characterizations of Ms. Scott's injuries by her doctor and the amount of steroid injections she received. Removing defendants, however, are not held to a due diligence standard."
Summary of this case from Williams v. Wal-Mart La., LLCOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-791-JJB-RLB
05-07-2015
SHERRY SCOTT, ET AL v. OFFICE DEPOT, INC.
RULING
The court has carefully considered the petition, the record, the law applicable to this action, and the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr. dated April 17, 2015 (doc. no. 12) to which no objection has been filed.
The court hereby approves the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and adopts it as the court's opinion herein. Accordingly, the plaintiff's Motion to Remand (doc. no. 10) is DENIED.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 7th day of May, 2015.
/s/_________
JAMES J. BRADY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE