Royal Crest Development Corporation v. Republic Insurance Co.
Decision Date | 22 November 1963 |
Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 63-C-1137. |
Citation | 225 F. Supp. 76 |
Parties | ROYAL CREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Inc., Plaintiff, v. REPUBLIC INSURANCE CO., Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Sidney Sigelman, St. George, S. I., for plaintiff.
Max J. Gwertzman, New York City, for defendant.
Plaintiff moves for an order remanding this action to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Richmond, on the ground that the action was removed improperly and without jurisdiction because of the lack of diversity of citizenship between the parties. The defendant cross-moved for leave to amend the petition for removal so as to add the allegation that the defendant's principal place of business is in the State of Texas, in the City of Dallas.
Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 1653 provides:
The Court in McGuigan v. Roberts, 170 F.Supp. 372 (S.D.N.Y.1959), stated that this section providing that defective allegations of jurisdiction may be amended is not limited and is broad enough to encompass a petition for removal.
If the time to amend has elapsed, the petition for removal may still be amended to correct the grounds for removal as previously set forth. In Hernandez v. Watson Bros. Transportation Co., 165 F.Supp. 720 (D.C.Colo.1958), the Court permitted an amendment to correct a petition for removal where the petition originally failed to allege the state of incorporation of the corporate party. In Firemen's Ins. Co. of Newark, N. J., v. Robbins Coal Co., 288 F.2d 349 (p. 350) (C.A.5th, 1961), certiorari denied, 368 U.S. 875, 82 S.Ct. 122, 7 L.Ed. 2d 77, the Court stated:
An amendment i...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Barrow Development Co. v. Fulton Insurance Co.
...v. Robbins Coal Co., 288 F.2d 349 (5th Cir. 1961), cert. den. 368 U.S. 875, 82 S.Ct. 122, 7 L.Ed.2d 77; Royal Crest Development Corp. v. Republic Ins. Co., 225 F.Supp. 76 (E.D.N.Y.1963). However, since removal must be effected by a defendant within 30 days after receiving a copy of the comp......
-
Handy v. Uniroyal, Inc.
...140 (D.S.C.1965); Teeter v. Iowa-Illinois Gas & Elec. Co., 237 F. Supp. 961, 963 (N.D.Iowa 1964); Royal Crest Development Corp. v. Republic Ins. Co., 225 F.Supp. 76 (E.D.N.Y.1963); Goforth v. Allstate Ins. Co., 213 F.Supp. 595 (W.D.N.C.1963); Park v. Hopkins, 179 F.Supp. 671 (S.D.Ind.1960).......
-
Harlem River Produce Co. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 65 Civ. 574.
...28 of the United States Code. See McGuigan & Kilcullen v. Roberts, 170 F.Supp. 372, 374 (S.D. N.Y.1959); Royal Crest Dev. Corp. v. Republic Ins. Co., 225 F.Supp. 76 (E.D. N.Y.1963). Compare Bradford v. Mitchell Bros. Truck Lines, 217 F.Supp. 525 Accordingly, Eximbank's petition of removal i......
-
Coditron Corp. v. AFA Protective Systems, Inc.
...appellate courts," and this provision has been held to apply to the removal petition itself. E. g., Royal Crest Development Corp. v. Republic Insurance Co., 225 F.Supp. 76 (E.D.N.Y.1963) (amendment to petition to allege defendant's principal place of business permitted on plaintiff's motion......