1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. RADOSTA v. LORILLARD TOBACCO CO.
 

RADOSTA v. LORILLARD TOBACCO CO.

Civil Action No. 14-0500.

ROSEMARY RADOSTA, v. LORILLARD TOBACCO CO., ET AL. SECTION: "A" (3).

United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana.

April 24, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rosemary Radosta, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford , Martzell & Bickford, Jason Zachary Landry , Martzell & Bickford, Lawrence J. Centola, III , Martzell & Bickford, Neil Franz Nazareth , Martzell & Bickford, Roshawn H. Donahue , Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody , Martzell & Bickford.

Dale Radosta, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford , Martzell & Bickford, Jason Zachary Landry , Martzell & Bickford, Lawrence J. Centola, III , Martzell & Bickford, Neil Franz Nazareth , Martzell & Bickford, Roshawn H. Donahue , Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody , Martzell & Bickford.

Don Radosta, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford , Martzell & Bickford, Jason Zachary Landry , Martzell & Bickford, Lawrence J. Centola, III , Martzell & Bickford, Neil Franz Nazareth , Martzell & Bickford, Roshawn H. Donahue , Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody , Martzell & Bickford.

Wayne Radosta, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford , Martzell & Bickford, Jason Zachary Landry , Martzell & Bickford, Lawrence J. Centola, III , Martzell & Bickford, Neil Franz Nazareth , Martzell & Bickford, Roshawn H. Donahue , Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody , Martzell & Bickford.

Mark Radosta, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford , Martzell & Bickford, Jason Zachary Landry , Martzell & Bickford, Lawrence J. Centola, III , Martzell & Bickford, Neil Franz Nazareth , Martzell & Bickford, Roshawn H. Donahue , Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody , Martzell & Bickford.

Jerome Radosta, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford , Martzell & Bickford, Jason Zachary Landry , Martzell & Bickford, Lawrence J. Centola, III , Martzell & Bickford, Neil Franz Nazareth , Martzell & Bickford, Roshawn H. Donahue , Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody , Martzell & Bickford.

Glenn Radosta, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford , Martzell & Bickford, Jason Zachary Landry , Martzell & Bickford, Lawrence J. Centola, III , Martzell & Bickford, Neil Franz Nazareth , Martzell & Bickford, Roshawn H. Donahue , Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody , Martzell & Bickford.

Frank Radosta, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford , Martzell & Bickford, Jason Zachary Landry , Martzell & Bickford, Lawrence J. Centola, III , Martzell & Bickford, Neil Franz Nazareth , Martzell & Bickford, Roshawn H. Donahue , Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody , Martzell & Bickford.

Lorillard Tobacco Company, Defendant, represented by Steven W. Copley , Gordon, Arata, McCollam, Duplantis & Eagan, Donna Phillips Currault , Gordon, Arata, McCollam, Duplantis & Eagan & Nina Wessel English , Gordon, Arata, McCollam, Duplantis & Eagan.

Eagle, Inc., Defendant, represented by Susan Beth Kohn , Simon, Peragine, Smith & Redfearn, LLP, Douglas Kinler , Simon, Peragine, Smith & Redfearn, LLP, James R. Guidry , Simon, Peragine, Smith & Redfearn, LLP, Louis Oliver Oubre , Simon, Peragine, Smith & Redfearn, LLP & Stephen Jared Austin , Simon, Peragine, Smith & Redfearn, LLP.

Reilly Benton Company, Inc., Defendant, represented by Thomas L. Cougill , Willingham Fultz & Cougill, Diane Sweezer Davis , Funderburk Finderburk Courtois, LLP, Jamie M Zanovec , Willingham, Fultz & Cougill & Jennifer D. Zajac , Willingham Fultz & Cougill.

Taylor-Seidenbach, Inc., Defendant, represented by Anne Elizabeth Medo , Hailey, McNamara, Hall, Larmann & Papale, David C Bach , Hailey, McNamara, Hall, Larmann & Papale LLP, Edward J. Lassus, Jr. , Hailey, McNamara, Hall, Larmann & Papale & Richard J. Garvey, Jr. , Hailey, McNamara, Hall, Larmann & Papale.

ORDER AND REASONS

JAY C. ZAINEY, District Judge.

Before the Court is a Motion to Remand (Rec. Doc. 3) filed by plaintiffs Dale Radosta, et al. Defendant Lorillard Tobacco Company opposes the motion (Rec. Doc. 8). The motion, noticed for submission on March 26, 2014, is before the Court on the briefs without oral argument.1 For the reasons that follow, the motion is GRANTED.

I.

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases