Densel v. Fidelity Life Association

Filing 3

OPINION AND ORDER directing that the parties Show Cause, if any there be, in writing by 11/1/2013, as to why this case should not be remanded to state court for want of subject-matter jurisdiction.. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 10/18/13. (djy, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION

WANDA DENSEL,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
FIDELITY LIFE ASSOCIATION, )
)
Defendant.
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
3:13cv756-MHT
(WO)

OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Wanda Densel brought this lawsuit in state
court, alleging breach of contract and bad faith.

She

claims that defendant Fidelity Life Association refused
to honor the provisions of her husband’s life insurance
policy.

Fidelity Life then removed this case to federal

court, asserting jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
1332 (diversity of citizenship) and 1441 (removal).

The

court, however, is concerned that this action may not
satisfy the requirements of diversity jurisdiction.
For purposes of removal pursuant to diversity-ofcitizenship jurisdiction, a removing defendant has the

burden

of

showing

(1)

that

the

citizenship

of

each

plaintiff is different from that of each defendant and
(2) that no defendant is a citizen of the forum state.
28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441(b)(2); see also Lincoln Prop. Co.
v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 84, 89 (2005) (“Since Strawbridge
v.

Curtiss,

3

Cranch

267

(1806),

we

have

read

the

statutory formulation ‘between ... citizens of different
States’

to

require

complete

diversity

between

all

plaintiffs and all defendants.”). Fidelity Life’s notice
of removal is deficient in both respects.
First, the removal notice indicates that Fidelity
Life is a corporation organized under the laws of the
State of Alabama, with its principal place of business in
Illinois.
citizen

of

“[A] corporation shall be deemed to be a
every

State

...

by

which

it

has

been

incorporated and of the State ... where it has its
principal place of business.”
(emphasis added).

28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1)

Therefore, in addition to being a

citizen of Illinois, it appears that Fidelity Life, like

2

Densel, is a citizen of Alabama, with the result that
complete diversity is absent.
Second, by statute, a civil action may not be removed
on

diversity-of-citizenship

parties

in

interest

grounds

properly

joined

“if

any

and

of

the

served

as

defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action
is brought.”

28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2).

This action was

originally brought in an Alabama court and therefore a
citizen of Alabama, like Fidelity Life, cannot remove it
to federal court on diversity-of-citizenship grounds.

***
For the above reasons, it is ORDERED that the parties
show cause, if any there be, in writing by November 1,
2013, as to why this case should not be remanded to state
court for want of subject-matter jurisdiction.
DONE, this the 18th day of October, 2013.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE