No basis has been provided for the court to exercise subject matter jurisdiction in this case. An appropriate order will be entered. Glimcher Holdings also asserts and the court accepts that it is incorporated in Delaware and maintains its principal place of business in Ohio. Plaintiffs have pled a facially valid claim against this defendant. A party who possesses, controls or manages business premises may be liable to an invitee whether or not that party is a lessee, agent of the lessee or otherwise licensed or engaged to operate a business on the premises.
Plaintiffs also ask for attorney fees and costs.
Mints v. Educ. While not required, a removing party's bad faith or improper purpose are factors which courts consider. The rule that a removing party bears the burden of demonstrating subject matter jurisdiction is rather basic. On the other hand, it appears that the removing defendant was on the verge of stipulating to the remand and thus with some forbearance by plaintiffs, there may have been no need to file a motion. There is no time limit on motions to remand on jurisdictional grounds.