IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MIDLAND DIVISION

SKINNY KID PRODUCTIONS, LLC

 Plaintiff,

V.

ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER & CO.; 

ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER SERVICE 

COMPANY, LLC

 Defendants.

§

§

§

§ C.A. NO. 7:20-cv-00107

§ 

§

§

§

§ 

§

§

DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF REMOVAL

Defendants Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. (“AJG”) and Arthur J. Gallagher 

Service Company, LLC (collectively, “Gallagher”) provide notice, pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, and 1446, of the removal of this action styled and numbered, 

Skinny Kid Productions, LLC v. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., et al., Cause No. A-20-

04-0433-CV, currently pending in the 70th Judicial District Court of Ector County, 

Texas to the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Midland

Division. As grounds for removal, Gallagher respectfully shows the Court as 

follows:

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

1. On April 21, 2020, Plaintiff Skinny Kid Productions, LLC (“Skinny 

Kid”) filed its state court lawsuit in the 70th Judicial District Court, Ector County, 

Case 7:20-cv-00107 Document 1 Filed 04/30/20 Page 1 of 7
Texas, Cause No. A-20-04-0433-CV. Skinny Kid alleges that it operates a raceway 

in Ector County, and it is the named insured under a property insurance policy

identified as:

Policy Number Insurance Company

SMPRP0000900 Arch Insurance Company

(the “Policy”). Skinny Kid alleges that the Policy provides coverage for eight 

buildings and contents in the amount of $550,000. 

2. Skinny Kid contends that, on or about October 7, 2018, its property 

sustained damage from a fire caused by a storm. It submitted a claim to the insurer 

under the Policy. Skinny Kid alleges that the insurer determined the amount of loss 

to be $307,740.95; however, the insurer found that the proper replacement cost of 

the buildings and contents on the property was $1,171,329, rather than the $550,000 

written in the Policy. Accordingly, the insurer applied a 53% co-insurance penalty 

for the property being underinsured, resulting in a payment of $148,671.86 to Skinny 

Kid. 

3. Skinny Kid sued the insurer, and the case was removed to this Court. 

See Civil Action No. 7:19-cv-136. The parties subsequently resolved that case.

4. Skinny Kid now brings a claim alleging that Gallagher, as the insurance 

broker, inspected the property and prepared a Statement of Values Schedule in the 

Policy assigning the replacement cost value of $550,000 to the structures/contents. 

Case 7:20-cv-00107 Document 1 Filed 04/30/20 Page 2 of 7
Skinny Kid alleges that Gallagher misrepresented the appropriate amount of 

replacement cost insurance needed under the Policy. 

5. Gallagher was served with process on April 27, 2020. Ex. 1. This 

Notice of Removal is filed within 30 days of April 27, 2020. As a result, this Notice 

of Removal is timely filed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). 

DOCUMENTS FROM REMOVED ACTION

6. Gallagher attaches true and correct copies of the following documents 

to this Notice of Removal:

Exhibit 1: All pleadings, orders, and other filings in state court action;

Exhibit 2: Citizenship of Skinny Kid;

Exhibit 3: Citizenship of Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.; and

Exhibit 4: Citizenship of Arthur J. Gallagher Service Company, LLC.

GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL

7. Gallagher invokes its right to remove “any civil action brought in a 

State court of which the district courts of the United States have original 

jurisdiction.” 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). Federal district courts have original jurisdiction 

over civil actions if the parties are citizens of different states and the amount in 

controversy exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). 

A. There is Complete Diversity of Citizenship.

8. This Court has original subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 

1332(a) because complete diversity exists between Skinny Kid and Gallagher and 

the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

Case 7:20-cv-00107 Document 1 Filed 04/30/20 Page 3 of 7
9. Skinny Kid asserts that it is a limited liability company organized and 

operating under the laws of the State of Texas. The citizenship of a limited liability 

company is determined by the citizenship of its members. Harvey v. Grey Wolf 

Drilling Co., 542 F. 3d 1077, 1080 (5th Cir. 2008) (“All federal appellate courts that 

have addressed the issue have reached the same conclusion: like limited partnerships 

and other unincorporated associates or entities, the citizenship of a LLC is 

determined by the citizenship of all of its members.”). Skinny Kid’s only reported

member/manager is Barbara Hughes, an individual domiciled in the State of Texas. 

Ex. 2. Skinny Kid is therefore a citizen of Texas.

10. Defendant Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. is incorporated in Delaware with 

its principal place of business in Illinois. Ex. 3. Accordingly, it is a citizen of 

Delaware and Illinois. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1) (“[A] corporation shall be deemed 

to be a citizen of every State and foreign state by which it has been incorporated and 

the State or foreign state where it has its principal place of business....”). 

11. Defendant Arthur J. Gallagher Service Company, LLC is a limited 

liability company. Defendant Arthur J. Gallagher Service Company, LLC has one 

member: Arthur J. Gallagher Financial Services, LLC. The sole member of Arthur 

J. Gallagher Financial Services, LLC is Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. (which is 

incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in Illinois). Ex. 4. 

Case 7:20-cv-00107 Document 1 Filed 04/30/20 Page 4 of 7
Thus, Arthur J. Gallagher Service Company, LLC is a citizen of both Delaware and 

Illinois. 

12. The parties are completely diverse. Complete diversity exists when no 

plaintiff is a citizen of the same state as any defendant. Mas v. Perry, 489 F.2d 1396, 

1398-99 (5th Cir. 1974) (citing Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267 

(1806)). Here, Skinny Kid is a citizen of Texas, and Gallagher is a citizen of 

Delaware and Illinois. Since Skinny Kid is not a citizen of the same state as 

Gallagher, complete diversity exists. 

B. The Amount in Controversy Requirement is Satisfied.

13. The amount in controversy in this case exceeds $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1332(a). Skinny asserts that it is seeking “monetary relief over $500,000 but not 

more than $1,000,000, including damages of any kind, penalties, costs, expenses, 

pre-judgment interest, and attorney [sic] fees.” Ex. 1, Original Pet. at ¶ 5; see also

28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(2) (“If removal of a civil action is sought on the basis of 

[diversity of citizenship], the sum demanded in good faith in the initial pleading shall 

be deemed to be the amount in controversy . . . .”). Thus, the amount in controversy 

requirement is satisfied. 

REMOVAL IS PROCEDURALLY CORRECT

14. Gallagher has filed this Notice of Removal within 30 days of service, 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). Ex. 1. Removal is therefore timely. 

Case 7:20-cv-00107 Document 1 Filed 04/30/20 Page 5 of 7
15. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), all Defendants consent to removal. 

16. Venue is proper in this District and Division under U.S.C. §§ 1441(a),

1446(a) because this District and Division include the county in which the state court 

action has been pending, and because a substantial part of the events giving rise to 

Skinny Kid’s claims allegedly occurred in this District and Division. 

17. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), all pleadings, process, orders, and all 

other filings in the state court action are attached to this Notice of Removal. Ex. 1. 

18. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), simultaneously or promptly after 

Gallagher files this Notice of Removal, written notice of the filing will be given to 

Skinny Kid, the adverse party, and a true and correct copy of this Notice of Removal 

will be filed with the clerk of the District Court of Ector County, Texas. 

19. By virtue of this Notice of Removal, Gallagher does not waive its right 

to assert any claims, defenses, or other motions permitted under the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure. 

CONCLUSION

20. Because there is complete diversity between the parties and the amount 

in controversy exceeds $75,000.00, Gallagher hereby removes this case to this Court

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332(a), 1441, and 1446. Gallagher further requests any 

other relief to which it may be entitled. 

Case 7:20-cv-00107 Document 1 Filed 04/30/20 Page 6 of 7
Respectfully submitted,

FOGLER, BRAR, O’NEIL & GRAY LLP

/s/ Murray Fogler

Murray Fogler

Attorney in Charge

State Bar No. 07207300

mfogler@fbfog.com

Jas Brar

State Bar No. 24059483

jbrar@fbfog.com

909 Fannin Street, Suite 1640

Houston, Texas 77010

Tel: 713.481.1010

Fax: 713.574.3224

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS ARTHUR 

J. GALLAGHER & CO. & ARTHUR J. 

GALLAGHER SERVICE COMPANY, LLC 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 30th day of April, 2020, a true and correct copy 

of the foregoing has been served on all counsel of record by the Electronic Service 

Provider, if registered, otherwise by email, as follows:

Shaun W. Hodge

shodge@hodgfirm.com

The Hodge Law Firm, PLLC

2211 Strand, Suite 302

Galveston, Texas 77550

(409) 762-5000 (Tel)

(409) 763-2300 (Fax)

COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR 

PLAINTIFF 

/s/ Jas Brar

Jas Brar

Case 7:20-cv-00107 Document 1 Filed 04/30/20 Page 7 of 7