Mutual First, LLC v. Tullos

Filing 7

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-494-FtM-29DNF

CHARLES WADE TULLOS,
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

$200,000 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 Englewood, Florida, and that
venue is proper in the district because defendant “resides” here.
(Doc. #1, ¶¶ 2, 4.)
individual

or

It is unclear whether defendant is actually

actually

a

corporation,

but

in

any

event

the

allegations as to citizenship are inadequate.
To the extent that Charles Wade Tullos 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).
residency is not the equivalent of pleading domicile.

Pleading
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

2

business. 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