Denis Reagan Hurley

He polices subject-matter jurisdiction sua sponte and is exacting about diversity pleading for unincorporated entities: an LLC's citizenship is the citizenship of EACH of its members, so alleging only the state of organization and principal place of business is insufficient. He will give the plaintiff a dated opportunity to amend, but if the defect is not cured he dismisses for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction -- even after nearly two years of litigation and even though a summary-judgment motion is pending. Plead LLC member citizenship correctly at the outset.

“the allegation that Encompass is 'a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of State of Delaware and maintains a principal place of business at 615 Macon Street, McDonough, Georgia 30253' is insufficient to allege its citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. ... this action must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”

On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion that raises qualified immunity and relies on matters outside the pleadings (e.g., a plaintiff's guilty-plea minutes), he will not consider the extrinsic material on the pleadings; instead he converts the motion to one for summary judgment and sets a briefing schedule, reasoning that qualified immunity is an immunity from suit that should be resolved as early as possible on a proper Rule 56 record. Expect a 12(b)(6) that depends on outside evidence to be converted, not decided on the complaint.

“Defendants' motion to dismiss is converted to one for summary judgment and the Court shall establish a briefing schedule so that all parties are 'given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56.'”

Where a single federal claim is dropped (here by an amendment of right that withdrew an ERISA count), he declines to retain supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. 1367(c)(3) and remands to state court, citing comity and the plaintiff's choice of forum -- especially early in the case before much has been litigated. If your only federal hook disappears, expect a remand rather than continued federal litigation.

“This case now involves only state law claims, rendering remand consistent with the comity interest that informs the doctrine of supplemental jurisdiction. ... the appropriate exercise of its discretion requires remand of this case to the state court.”

Docket-practice note (grounded in docket, Kabil v. Mercantile Adjustment Bureau, 2:22-cv-00989): when a premotion-conference dispute is fully framed by the parties' letters, he will treat the premotion letters as the briefing on the motion itself rather than requiring formal motion papers, giving any party a deadline to object or add authorities. Take premotion letters seriously -- they may BE your brief.

“In the Court's view, the issue is fully framed such that the premotion conference letters should be treated as the briefing on the motion itself. To the extent that any party (1) objects to converting the premotion conference letter to the motion itself and/or (2) wishes to put additional arguments or authorities before the Court, it may do so by letter ... Ordered by Judge Denis R. Hurley on 3/22/2022.”