X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:The defendant, Pioneer Americas, a Canadian company and citizen, operated hydrogen processing equipment in its St. Gabriel, La., facility. By Pioneer’s admission, an amount of mercury almost double that allowed by its federal permits, but not necessarily an amount exceeding federal or state health standards, seeped from the equipment into the atmosphere. Citizens living near the facility argue that the seeping mercury threatened their health. Pioneer reported the emissions to defendant Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, after which DEQ investigated, determined that the increased levels of mercury were only slightly problematic, and fined Pioneer about $400,000. According to plaintiffs, DEQ neglected its statutory duties to monitor, inspect, report emissions and warn citizens of dangerous emissions. Plaintiffs sued defendants in state court, alleging negligence and seeking damages for personal injury. Without DEQ’s consent, Pioneer removed to the federal district court for the Middle District of Louisiana, asserting diversity jurisdiction under �1332(a), based on improper joinder of DEQ, and the Class Action Fairness Act, �1332(d). Plaintiffs moved to remand, arguing that Pioneer failed to show improper joinder of DEQ and failed to demonstrate that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000. After defendants argued CAFA in their responses, plaintiffs replied that this case fell into two exceptions to jurisdiction under CAFA. They did not challenge defendants’ allegation of prima facie CAFA jurisdiction � minimal diversity and at least $5 million in controversy � aside from implicitly challenging the amount in controversy under �1332(a). The magistrate judge, placing the burden to show the absence of CAFA jurisdiction on plaintiffs, concluded that plaintiffs did not contest prima facie jurisdiction under CAFA and that neither CAFA exception applied. He declined to address diversity jurisdiction afforded by �1332(a). Plaintiffs objected to the report but did not challenge the presence of prima facie jurisdiction under CAFA. The district court agreed with the magistrate judge, and this court granted leave to appeal. HOLDING:Affirmed. Longstanding �1441(a) doctrine placing the burden on plaintiffs to show exceptions to jurisdiction buttresses the clear congressional intent to do the same with CAFA, the court states. This result is supported by the reality that plaintiffs are better positioned than defendants to carry this burden. The court holds that plaintiffs have the burden to show the applicability of the ��1332(d)(3)-(5) exceptions when jurisdiction turns on their application. Section 1332(d)(5)(A) excepts from CAFA jurisdiction “any class action in which . . . the primary defendants are States, State officials, or other governmental entities ["states"] against whom the district court may be foreclosed from ordering relief.” Plaintiffs urge that remand is proper here because DEQ, a primary defendant, is undisputedly a state entity. Defendants respond that this exception requires that all primary defendants be states, and Pioneer is a primary defendant. The court agrees with the defendants’ reading. The plain text of �1332(d)(5)(A), using the definite article before the plural nouns, requires that all primary defendants be states. Because CAFA eliminated the requirement of unanimity of consent to removal, a state may find itself in a case removed to federal court without having joined in the removal. Such a state, having taken no affirmative act, has not waived immunity and can still assert it. A federal court may ignore sovereign immunity until the state asserts it. Section 1332(d)(4), the “local controversy exception,” does not preclude jurisdiction. Plaintiffs argue that DEQ is a citizen of Louisiana, but it is long-settled that a state has no citizenship for �1332(a) diversity purposes. OPINION:Higginbotham, J.; Higginbotham, Benavides and Owen, J.J.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.