SFR SERVICES LLC
v.
HERITAGE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

M.D. Fla. | 2022-09-14
No. 2:22-cv-573
District Court, M.D. Florida (2022)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to adequately plead the citizenship of the corporate defendant.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff filed a breach of contract case in federal court, asserting diversity jurisdiction. The plaintiff's complaint only stated the defendant was …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Corporate Citizenship 28 U.S.C. § 1332(C) 28 U.S.C. § 1332(A) Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Corporate Citizenship cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Defendant. /

ORDER1

Before the Court is Plaintiff SFR Services LLC’s Complaint. (Doc. 1). This is a breach of contract case where SFR claims the Court has diversity jurisdiction. Because federal courts have limited jurisdiction, they are “obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it may be lacking.” Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F. 3d 405, 410 (11th Cir. 1999). Federal courts have original jurisdiction over cases with complete diversity and an amount in controversy over $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Here, SFR has provided insufficient information

28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1) (emphasis added). Because SFR has neither explicitly stated where Heritage is incorporated nor alleged anything about where Heritage’s principal place of business is located, the Court can only speculate about its citizenship. But speculation is not enough for Plaintiff to meet its jurisdictional burden. The Court thus finds that is lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action and dismisses the Complaint without prejudice. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED:

1. The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 2. Plaintiff SFR Services LLC may file an amended complaint on or before September 21, 2022. Failure to do so will cause this action

to be closed without further notice. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on September 14, 2022.

ites POLSTER atta

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies: All Parties of Record

Footnotes
1 Disclaimer: Papers hyperlinked to CM/ECF may be subject to PACER fees. By using hyperlinks, the Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or their services or products, nor does it have any agreements with them. The Court is not responsible for a hyperlink’s functionality, and a failed hyperlink does not affect this Order. about the citizenship of Defendant Heritage Property & Casualty Insurance Company. All that’s pled is “Defendant is a Florida For-Profit Corporation in the business of insurance, and conducting business in Fort Myers, Lee County, Florida, and throughout the State of Florida.” (Doc. 1 at 2). But a corporation is a citizen of “every State and foreign state by which it has been incorporated and of the State or foreign state where it has its principal place of business…”

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw