GECKO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
v.
O'NEAL
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.
The court held that the complaint failed to adequately plead subject-matter jurisdiction because it did not properly allege the defendant's citizenship.
Plaintiff filed a diversity action in federal court. The complaint only alleged the defendant's residence, not his citizenship, which is required for …
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sua Sponte Review cases and more on FLexlaw
RALPH BENJAMIN O’NEAL, JR. ,
Defendant. /
OPINION AND ORDER1
Before the Court is a sua sponte review of the file. Plaintiff Gecko Development Corporation brings this diversity action against Defendant Ralph O’Neal, Jr. Since Gecko Development is proceeding in federal court, it must show the parties are completely diverse with an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 552 (2005). And district courts 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).
jurisdiction. “Citizenship, not residence, is the key fact that must be alleged in the complaint to establish diversity for a natural person.” Taylor v. Appleton, 30 F. 3d 1365, 1367 (11th Cir. 1994). A party’s residence in a state—without more—is not enough to show citizenship. E.g., Travaglio v. Am. Express Co.,
735 F. 3d 1266, 1269 (11th Cir. 2013). Rather, “[c]itizenship is equivalent to domicile for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The Complaint, therefore, fails to correctly plead the citizenship of O’Neal. Because the Court cannot conclude it has jurisdiction,
the Court dismisses the complaint without prejudice. Gecko Development may file an amended complaint that adequately pleads subject-matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1653. Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint consistent with this Order on or before July 6, 2021. The failure to file a timely amended
complaint will result in the case being closed without further notice. DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Myers, FL on June 21, 2021.
tite POLSTER otal
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Univ. OF S. Ala. v. THE Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405 (11th Cir. 1999)
- Taylor v. Appleton, 30 F.3d 1365 (11th Cir. 1994)
- Tina arie Travaglio v. Am. Express Co., 735 F.3d 1266 (11th Cir. 2013)
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546 (U.S. 2005)