Source: http://ace-insurance-litigation.com/ace-ina-litigation/case/stewart-v-target-corporation-minnesota-et-al
Timestamp: 2017-07-28 00:55:08
Document Index: 343770852

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1332', '§ 1332', '§1446', '§ 1446', '§ 1446', '§ 1332', '§ 98', '§ 1441', '§ 1332', '§ 1441', '§ 1446', '§ 1446']

STEWART v. TARGET CORPORATION OF MINNESOTA et al | ACE Insurance Litigation Watch
Home › Litigation Index › STEWART v. TARGET CORPORATION OF MINNESOTA et al ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.
Case Number: 3:16-cv-00009 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): ACE American Insurance Company Opposing Party: Brooke Stewart Court Type: Federal US District Court: Middle District of Louisiana Date Filed: Jan 7 2016 Complaint: STEWART v. TARGET CORPORATION OF MINNESOTA et al complaint Docket: STEWART v. TARGET CORPORATION OF MINNESOTA et al docket NOTICE OF REMOVAL
Corporation of Minnesota (“Target”), and ACE American Insurance Company (“ACE”) who
hereby request this Honorable Court to remove that certain matter styled “Brooke Stewart versus
Target Corporation of Minnesota and ACE American Insurance Company,” suit number 642813,
State of Louisiana, (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the “state court proceeding”), to the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, on the following grounds, to-
1. REMOVAL IS PROPER BECAUSE THIS COURT HAS SUBJECT MATTER
28 U.S.C. § 1332 provides Federal District courts with concurrent original jurisdiction in
cases “where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of
interest and costs, and is between- citizens of different States.”
A. THE AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY EXCEEDS $75,000.00.
damages, and within the last 30 days, defendants have received “other paper(s)” which evidence
labrum at the surgery’s anchor placement. Plaintiff was given an injection but reported on July
surgery. Plaintiffs medical treatment appears is ongoing, and a second surgery has been
of Louisiana has concurrent original jurisdiction under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1332, et
seq., as the amount in controversy exceeds SEVENTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/lOO
II. DEFENDANTS HAVE STATISFIED THE PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
through its registered agent for service of process on October 15, 2015. Defendant ACE
constitutes “other papers” under 28 U.S.C. §1446(b) (3) from which it may first be ascertained
timely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) (3) and 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c).
Jurisdiction is founded in the existence of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332,
located within the Middle District of Louisiana pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 98(a). Therefore, venue
is proper in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a).
the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. See, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, 28
U.S.C. §§ 1441 & 1446-1451.
removal of that certain matter styled, “Brooke Stewart versus Target Corporation of Minnesota
and ACE American Insurance Company,” suit number 642813, from the docket of the 19th
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), a copy of the all pleadings filed in the state court
proceeding are attached as exhibits. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), a copy of this Notice of
WHEREFORE, defendants. Target Corporation of Minnesota, and Ace American