Smart Alabama, LLC v. Sompo Japan Insurance Company of America
OPINION AND ORDER: It is therefore the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that the plaintiff has until May 17, 2018, to amend the complaint to allege jurisdiction sufficiently; otherwise this lawsuit shall be dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 5/10/2018. (kh, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
SMART ALABAMA, LLC,
SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA,
CIVIL ACTION NO.
OPINION AND ORDER
This court previously granted plaintiff leave to
However, the allegations of the amended
complaint are still insufficient to invoke this court's
original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (diversity
To invoke original jurisdiction based on diversity,
the complaint must distinctly and affirmatively allege
Airlines, Inc., 511 F. 2d 653, 654 (5th Cir. 1975) (per
citizenship of each plaintiff is different from that of
See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; see also 2 James
8.03[b] at 8-16 (3d ed. 2006).
The complaint here is insufficient because it does
not properly indicate the citizenship of each of the
members of plaintiff Smart Alabama, LLC.
limited partnership, a limited liability company is a
citizen of any state of which a member of the company
is a citizen.”
Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH
Holdings L.L.C., 374 F.3d 1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004).
The complaint must therefore allege “the citizenships
of all the members of the limited liability company.”
“residents” of Alabama.
However, “[r]esidence alone is
not enough.... Citizenship is equivalent to ‘domicile’
for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.... And domicile
requires both residence in a state and an intention to
remain there indefinitely....”
Travaglio v. Am. Exp.
Co., 735 F.3d 1266, 1269 (11th Cir. 2013) (internal
quotation marks and citations omitted).
not residence, is the key fact that must be alleged in
Taylor v. Appleton, 30 F.3d 1365, 1367 (11th
plaintiff leave to amend, with specific and detailed
instructions as to what to do.
Counsel for plaintiff
are clearly not reading the court's orders carefully
and are not making sure that what is required by the
law is being done.
This cannot continue.
It is therefore the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of
the court that the plaintiff has until May 17, 2018, to
sufficiently; otherwise this lawsuit shall be dismissed
DONE, this the 10th day of May, 2018.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?