Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Burress v. Mr. G & G Trucking, LLC, 19-cv-0791-slc. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. Wisconsin Number: infdco20191021c58 Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 18, 2019
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER STEPHEN L. CROCKER , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs have filed this civil action involving a motor vehicle accident and allege diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332. Dkt. 3. The complaint's allegations regarding citizenship for the parties are inadequate: the complaint only identifies the residences of plaintiffs Jared and Megan Burress and defendants Guido Rivadeneira and Liosbany Rafael Alcolea Aguilera, and the state of incorporation for defendant Mr. G & G Truck
More

OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiffs have filed this civil action involving a motor vehicle accident and allege diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Dkt. 3. The complaint's allegations regarding citizenship for the parties are inadequate: the complaint only identifies the residences of plaintiffs Jared and Megan Burress and defendants Guido Rivadeneira and Liosbany Rafael Alcolea Aguilera, and the state of incorporation for defendant Mr. G & G Trucking, LLC. More is needed.

The first question in any lawsuit is whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction, and the court has an independent obligation to ensure that it exists. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corporation, 546 U.S. 500, 501 (2006); Avila v. Pappas, 591 F.3d 552, 553 (7th Cir. 2010). Section 1332 requires complete diversity of citizenship, meaning that no plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any defendant. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1); McCready v. EBay, Inc., 453 F.3d 882, 891 (7th Cir. 2006). As the parties seeking removal, defendants bear the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. Morris v. Nuzzo, 718 F.3d 660, 668 (7th Cir. 2013).

The citizenship, not the residency, of an individual is what matters for diversity jurisdiction purposes. Craig v. Ontario Corp., 543 F.3d 872, 876 (7th Cir. 2008); Meyerson v. Harrah's East Chicago Casino, 299 F.3d 616, 617 (7th Cir. 2002). An individual is a citizen of the state in which he is domiciled, that is, where he has a "permanent home and principal establishment, and to which [he] has the intention of returning whenever he is absent therefrom." Charles Alan Wright, Law of Federal Courts 161 (5th ed. 1994); see also Dakuras v. Edwards, 312 F.3d 256, 258 (7th Cir. 2002).

Next, the citizenship of a limited liability company such as Mr. G & G Trucking, LLC is the citizenship of each of its members. Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007) (citations omitted) ("an LLC's jurisdictional statement must identify the citizenship of each of its members as of the date the complaint or notice of removal was filed, and, if those members have members, the citizenship of those members as well").

Because the complaint does not identify or allege the citizenship of the Burresses, Rivadeneira, Aguilera, or the members of Mr. G & G Trucking, LLC, the court cannot determine whether plaintiffs are diverse with respect to all of the defendants.

Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that defendants have until November 1, 2019 to submit verification of the citizenship of the Burresses, Rivadeneira, Aguilera, and each of the members of Mr. G & G Trucking, LLC, (an affidavit would do).

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer