From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fields v. Zubkov

United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Sep 26, 2008
Civil Action No. 08-2016 (WJM) (D.N.J. Sep. 26, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 08-2016 (WJM).

September 26, 2008


ORDER


A Report and Recommendation was filed on by Magistrate Judge Mark Faulk on September 8, 2008 recommending that Plaintiff's motion to remand this action to state court be denied and Plaintiff's motion to file an amended complaint to name Plaintiff's no-fault insurance carrier, New Jersey United Reciprocal Exchange ("NJ Cure"), as defendant be granted. The parties were notified that they had ten days to submit objections and responses to the Report and Recommendation pursuant to Local Civil Rule 72.1(c)(2). No objection or response having been received by this Court, and the Court having reviewed the Report and Recommendation de novo, and good cause appearing,

IT IS on this 25th day of September 2008, hereby

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mark Falk is adopted as the Opinion of this Court; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to remand this action to state court is DENIED; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to file an amended complaint to name NJ Cure as defendant is GRANTED; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file, 7 days from the date hereof, an amended complaint naming NJ Cure as a defendant thereby destroying the diversity of citizenship on which the subject matter jurisdiction of this Court rests.


Summaries of

Fields v. Zubkov

United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Sep 26, 2008
Civil Action No. 08-2016 (WJM) (D.N.J. Sep. 26, 2008)
Case details for

Fields v. Zubkov

Case Details

Full title:LAVADA FIELDS, Plaintiff, v. IGOR ZUBKOV, V R TRUCKING INC., and JOHN DOES…

Court:United States District Court, D. New Jersey

Date published: Sep 26, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No. 08-2016 (WJM) (D.N.J. Sep. 26, 2008)

Citing Cases

31-01 Broadway Assocs. v. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co.

Moreover, "[a] plaintiff's conduct may be considered dilatory when the purpose of the delay was to…

Testa v. Broomall Operating Co.

In considering whether a plaintiff was dilatory, courts “takes into consideration the length and nature of…