Weavers v. G M R I, Inc., 20-cv-0260. (2020)
Court: District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20200304b56
Visitors: 10
Filed: Mar. 02, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER MARK L. HORNSBY , Magistrate Judge . Haleigh Weavers ("Plaintiff") filed this civil action against GMRI, Inc. based on an assertion of diversity jurisdiction, which puts the burden on Plaintiff to set forth specific allegations that show complete diversity of citizenship of the parties and an amount in controversy over $75,000. Plaintiff alleges that she is a resident, and therefore a citizen, of Georgia. It is domicile rather than mere residency that decides citizenship f
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER MARK L. HORNSBY , Magistrate Judge . Haleigh Weavers ("Plaintiff") filed this civil action against GMRI, Inc. based on an assertion of diversity jurisdiction, which puts the burden on Plaintiff to set forth specific allegations that show complete diversity of citizenship of the parties and an amount in controversy over $75,000. Plaintiff alleges that she is a resident, and therefore a citizen, of Georgia. It is domicile rather than mere residency that decides citizenship fo..
More
MEMORANDUM ORDER
MARK L. HORNSBY, Magistrate Judge.
Haleigh Weavers ("Plaintiff") filed this civil action against GMRI, Inc. based on an assertion of diversity jurisdiction, which puts the burden on Plaintiff to set forth specific allegations that show complete diversity of citizenship of the parties and an amount in controversy over $75,000.
Plaintiff alleges that she is a resident, and therefore a citizen, of Georgia. It is domicile rather than mere residency that decides citizenship for diversity purposes. Midcap Media Finance, LLC v. Pathway Data, Inc., 929 F.3d 310, 313 (5th Cir. 2019). The court will assume that Plaintiff intended to allege that she is a domiciliary of Georgia. If this assumption is incorrect, Plaintiff should make note of it in the jurisdiction section of the case management report that the court will direct the parties to file in the near future.
Considering this assumption and the other allegations of fact in the complaint, the court makes a preliminary finding that there is a basis for subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. This finding is preliminary and may be reconsidered sua sponte or on appropriate motion.
Source: Leagle
