Seigle v. Bagwell et al

Filing 6

ORDER dismissing case. On or before November 11, 2016, Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file an Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 10/31/2016. (VMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
LU ANN SEIGLE,
Plaintiff,
-v-

Case No. 6:16-cv-1811-Orl-37DCI

STEPHANIE BAGWELL; CHRISTINA M.
CARMON; ALEX SEIGLE TRUST FBO
LU ANN SEIGLE, U.S. TRUST, BANK OF
AMERICA N.A.,
Defendants.
______________________________________

ORDER
This cause is before the Court for jurisdictional review. See Travaglio v. Am. Exp.
Co., 735 F.3d 1266, 1268 (11th Cir. 2013) (noting the court’s constitutional obligation to
dismiss actions sua sponte where sufficient jurisdictional allegations are absent from the
complaint, and “the plaintiff does not cure the deficiency”).
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require a party to file Aa short and plain
statement of the grounds for the court=s jurisdiction. . . .@

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(1).

Specifically, to establish diversity jurisdiction, the factual allegations of the Complaint
must show that: (1) the citizenship of the parties is completely diverse; and (2) the
amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Citizenship of an
“unincorporated business association or entity,” such as a limited liability company
depends on the citizenship of its individual members. See Scuotto v. Lakeland Tours,
1

LLC, No. 3:13-cv-1393, 2013 WL 6086046, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 19, 2013). For an
incorporated entity, citizenship turns on the state of incorporation and the location of the
entity’s principal place of business. See Taylor v. Appleton, 30 F.3d 1365, 1367
(11th Cir. 1994). For natural persons, citizenship equates to domicile—not residence.
See Travaglio, 735 F.3d at 1269 (emphasis added); Molinos Valle Del Cibao v. Lama,
633 F.3d 1330, 1341–42 (11th Cir. 2011).
Here, Plaintiff Lu Ann Seigle (“Plaintiff”) appears to have named three
Defendants in her rather obtuse Complaint—Bank of America N.A. (“BOA”), and its
employees, Stephanie Bagwell (“Bagwell”) and Christina M. Carmon (“Carmon”).
Plaintiff alleges that BOA is incorporated in Delaware and its principal place of business
is in North Carolina. (Doc. No. 1 (“Complaint”).) Notably, the Complaint includes no
allegations concerning the citizenship—that is domicile—of herself, Bagwell or Carmon.
Absent such allegations, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to articulate an adequate
basis for this Court to exercise jurisdiction in this matter, and the Complaint is due to be
dismissed with leave to amend.1
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1.

The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.

2.

On or before November 11, 2016, Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file an

Complaints should be drafted in accordance with the pleading requirements of Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a), 8(e), and 10(b). The disorganized and confusing Complaint
filed in this action does not satisfy such pleading requirements.
1

2

Amended Complaint alleging a sufficient factual basis for this Court’s
exercise of subject-matter jurisdiction.
3.

Failure to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of this action without
further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on October 27, 2016.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record

3