ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, INC.
v.
V&A DRYWALL AND STUCCO, INC.
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 plaintiff failed to properly plead diversity jurisdiction because it did not identify the citizenship of all members of the defendant LLC.
Plaintiff Accident Insurance Company, Inc. (AIC) filed a diversity action against multiple defendants, including Platinum Service Contracting LLC. AIC…
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 Of Llcs cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant. /
ORDER1
Before the Court is a sua sponte review of the file. Plaintiff Accident Insurance Company, Inc. (“AIC”) brings this diversity action against several Defendants, including Platinum Service Contracting LLC. Since AIC 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).
Accordingly, each member of the LLC must be diverse from the plaintiff. See
Americold Realty Tr. v. Conagra Foods, Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1012, 1015 (2016). Since an LLC is a citizen of every member’s state, the Complaint must identify each of the members and their citizenship. See Rolling Greens, 374 F. 3d at 1022 (A “party must list the citizenships of all the members of the” LLC). AIC states that the parties are diverse, yet it identifies neither the members of Platinum nor their domiciles. (Doc. 1 at 2). Instead, AIC merely states “[u]pon information and belief, each and every member of PLATINUM is a resident of Florida.” (Doc. 1 at 2). Without identifying each of Platinum’s members and every state where they are domiciled, the Court cannot conclude the parties are completely diverse.
That is not the only issue. The Complaint only alleges each member of Platinum is a “resident” of Florida. (Doc. 1 at 2). “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 Platinum’s citizenship. Because the Court cannot conclude it has jurisdiction, the Court dismisses the Complaint without prejudice. AIC may file an amended complaint that adequately pleads subject-matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C § 1653.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. Plaintiffs Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.
2. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint consistent with this Order on or before June 26, 2020. The failure to file a timely amended complaint will result in the case being closed without further notice. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 12th day of June, 2020.
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)
- Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings L.L.C., 374 F.3d 1020 (11th Cir. 2004)
- 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)
- Americold Realty Tr. v. Conagra Foods, Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1012 (U.S. 2016)