FOX
v.
USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
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 defendant failed to adequately plead diversity of citizenship, thus lacking subject matter jurisdiction for removal.
Plaintiff sued Defendant in state court for breach of contract regarding insurance coverage for Hurricane Irma damage. Defendant removed the case to f…
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 Citizenship For Diversity Purposes cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant. /
ORDER1
Before the Court is Defendant USAA Causality Insurance Company’s Notice of Removal. (Doc. 1). This breach of contract suit stems from damage that Hurricane Irma caused to Plaintiff Edward L. Fox, Jr.’s home. Plaintiff sued Defendant in state court alleging that Defendant has refused to pay the full replacement cost value to Plaintiff under an insurance policy. Defendant then removed the case to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction. Removal permits a defendant to move a case from state court to a federal district court when the federal court has original subject matter jurisdiction over the suit. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). “A removing defendant bears the burden of proving proper federal jurisdiction.” Leonard v. Enter. Rent a Car, 279 F. 3d 967, 972 (11th Cir. 2002). “Because removal jurisdiction raises significant federalism concerns, federals courts are directed to construe removal statutes strictly” and resolve “all doubts about jurisdiction . . . in favor of
Here, Defendant has not shown a diversity of citizenship between the parties. All Defendant says is “Plaintiff is a Citizen and resident of the State of Florida.” (Doc. 1 at 2). But individuals are citizens where they are domiciled, not necessarily where they are residents. See McCormick v. Aderholt, 293 F. 3d 1254, 1257 (11th Cir. 2002). Because there are no allegations to support Plaintiff’s domicile, Defendant has not adequately pleaded diversity of citizenship. In addition, for both original and removal diversity jurisdiction, a corporation is deemed a citizen of any state by which it has been incorporated and of the state where it has its principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c). Defendant only says it is a Texas Corporation (Doc. 1 at 2). Defendant must
plead its principal place of business to comply with 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c). Without showing diversity of citizenship, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this case. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: Defendant Metropolitan Group Property and Casualty Insurance Company must SUPPLEMENT the Notice of Removal on or before October 2, 2020, to show cause why this case should not be remanded for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Failure to comply with this Order will cause this case being remanded without further notice. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 18th day of September 2020.
Lhe hlatrrthe 7
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)
- McCORMICK v. Aderholt, 293 F.3d 1254 (11th Cir. 2002)
- Morrison v. Allstate Indem. Co., 228 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2000)
- Leonard v. Enter. Rent A CAR, 279 F.3d 967 (11th Cir. 2002)