Mutual First, LLC v. Jones
Filing
5
ORDER dismissing 1 Original Complaint filed by Mutual First, LLC for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction without prejudice to filing an Amended Complaint within 7 days of this Order. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 8/28/2014. (RKR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
MUTUAL FIRST, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No: 2:14-cv-493-FtM-29CM
TED E. JONES,
Defendant.
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on review of the Original
Complaint (Doc. #1) filed on August 25, 2014. 1
jurisdiction
is
premised
on
the
jurisdiction between the parties.
complete
diversity
of
presence
of
(Id., ¶ 3.)
citizenship,
and
that
Subject-matter
diversity
of
This requires
the
matter
in
controversy exceed the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of
interest and costs.
28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Morrison v. Allstate
Indem. Co., 228 F.3d 1255, 1261 (11th Cir. 2000).
Plaintiff seeks
$128,000 in damages, and therefore the Court is satisfied as to
the amount in controversy.
Plaintiff alleges that it is a “Texas Limited Liability
corporation”.
1
(Doc. #1, ¶ 1.)
Plaintiff does not identify the
If the Court determines “at any time” that it lacks subjectmatter jurisdiction, the Court must dismiss the case.
Fed. R.
Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
members or the citizenship of the individual members of the limited
liability company, and a limited liability company is a citizen of
any state of which a member is a citizen.
Rolling Greens MHP,
L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings L.L.C., 374 F.3d 1020 (11th Cir.
2004).
Therefore, the Court cannot determine the citizenship of
plaintiff, or that diversity of jurisdiction is present.
Plaintiff alleges that defendant is an individual “whose
principal place of business” is in Port Charlotte, Florida, and
that venue is proper in the district because defendant “resides”
here.
(Doc. #1, ¶¶ 2, 4.)
It is unclear whether defendant is
actually individual or actually a corporation, but in any event
the allegations as to citizenship are inadequate.
To the extent that Ted E. Jones is sued individually, “[i]n
order to be a citizen of a State within the meaning of the diversity
statute, a natural person must both be a citizen of the United
States and be domiciled within the State.”
Newman-Green, Inc. v.
Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 828 (1989).
Pleading residency is
not the equivalent of pleading domicile.
Molinos Valle Del Cibao,
C. por A. v. Lama, 633 F.3d 1330, 1341 (11th Cir. 2011); Corporate
Mgmt. Advisors, Inc. v. Artjen Complexus, Inc., 561 F.3d 1294,
1297 (11th Cir. 2009); Taylor v. Appleton, 30 F.3d 1365, 1367 (11th
Cir. 1994).
To the extent that defendant may be incorporated, a
corporation is a citizen of both the state of its incorporation
and the state where it has its principal place of business.
2
28
U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). The principal place of business is determined
by the “nerve center” test.
Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77
(2010).
Plaintiff
will
be
provided
an
opportunity
to
state
the
presence of federal jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1653.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
The Original Complaint (Doc. #1) is dismissed for lack of
subject-matter jurisdiction without prejudice to filing an Amended
Complaint within SEVEN (7) DAYS of this Order.
DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this
August, 2014.
Copies:
Counsel of record
3
28th
day of
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?