Covington Specialty Insurance Company v. Hillsborough, LLC et al

Filing 8

ORDER: Plaintiff is directed to file an Amended Complaint containing appropriate jurisdictional allegations, consistent with the foregoing, by June 21, 2018. Failure to do so will result in the entry of an Order dismissing this case for lack of jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 6/12/2018. (KAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
COVINGTON SPECIALTY
INSURANCE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 8:18-cv-1299-T-33MAP

HILLSBOROUGH, LLC d/b/a
RIVERSIDE VILLA APARTMENTS,
DAVID DAVIDSON, DEBORAH DENTON
STEARNS, and DANNY STEARNS,
Defendants.
______________________________/
ORDER
This cause is before the Court sua sponte.

“A federal court

not only has the power but also the obligation at any time to
inquire

into

jurisdiction

whenever

jurisdiction does not exist arises.”

the

possibility

that

Fitzgerald v. Seaboard Sys.

R.R., Inc., 760 F.2d 1249, 1251 (11th Cir. 1985); Hallandale Prof’l
Fire Fighters Local 2238 v. City of Hallandale, 922 F.2d 756, 759
(11th Cir. 1991) (stating “every federal court operates under an
independent obligation to ensure it is presented with the kind of
concrete

controversy

upon

which

its

constitutional

grant

of

authority is based”).
Moreover, Federal Courts are courts of limited jurisdiction.
Taylor v. Appleton, 30 F.3d 1365, 1367 (11th Cir. 1994). And
“because a federal court is powerless to act beyond its statutory

grant of subject matter jurisdiction, a court must zealously
[e]nsure that jurisdiction exists over a case, and should itself
raise the question of subject matter jurisdiction at any point in
the litigation where a doubt about jurisdiction arises.”

Smith v.

GTE Corp., 236 F.3d 1292, 1299 (11th Cir. 2001).
Diversity Jurisdiction
It is well settled that “for federal diversity jurisdiction
to attach, all parties must be completely diverse and the amount
in controversy must exceed $75,000.” Underwriters at Lloyd’s London
v. Osting-Schwinn, 613 F.3d 1079, 1085 (11th Cir. 2010). Here, the
Complaint alleges this is an action for damages “to be in excess
of $75,000.00 exclusive of costs and interest.” (Doc. # 1 at ¶ 2).
However,

the

parties’

citizenship

is

not

clear

based

on

the

Complaint. The Complaint alleges that Defendant, Hillsborough LLC,
is a limited liability company formed under the laws of Florida
with its principal place of business in Hillsborough County,
Florida. (Doc. # 1 at ¶ 4). However, the Complaint fails to provide
information about Hillsborough LLC necessary for the Court to
determine whether the requirements of complete diversity have been
satisfied. A limited liability company is a business entity which
can be comprised of multiple members or partners. In order for a
complaint

“to

unincorporated

sufficiently
business

allege

entities,

2

the
a

citizenships
party

must

of

.

list

.

.

the

citizenships of all the members of the limited liability company.”
See Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. Comcast SCH Holdings LLC, 374 F3d
1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004). Without knowing the citizenship of
the individual members, the Court is unable to determine whether
the requirements of complete diversity have been satisfied.
Additionally,

the

Complaint

fails

to

properly

state

the

citizenship of the individual Defendants: David Davidson, Deborah
Denton Stearns, and Danny Stearns. The Complaint states that these
Defendant are “residents” of Hillsborough County, Florida, rather
than indicating that they are citizens of Florida. (Doc. # 1 at ¶
5-7). As explained in Molinos Valle Del Cibao, C. por A. V. Lama,
63 F. 3d 1330, 1342 n.12 (11th Cir. 2011), a complaint must allege
citizenship, not residence, to establish diversity for a natural
person.
Accordingly, the Court directs Plaintiff to file an Amended
Complaint alleging the identity and citizenship of every member of
Hillsborough, LLC and properly alleging the citizenship of each
individual Defendant by June 21, 2018.

Failure to do so will

result in the entry of an Order dismissing this case for lack of
jurisdiction. See Travaglio v. Am. Express Co., 735 F.3d 1266,
1268 (11th Cir. 2013)(“When a plaintiff files suit in federal
court, she must allege facts that, if true, show federal subject
matter jurisdiction over her case exists. Those allegations, when

3

federal jurisdiction is invoked based on diversity, must include
the citizenship of each party, so that the court is satisfied that
no plaintiff is a citizen of the same state as any defendant
.

.

.

.

Without

such

allegations,

district

courts

are

constitutionally obligated to dismiss the action altogether if the
plaintiff does not cure the deficiency.”).
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
Plaintiff is directed to file an Amended Complaint containing
appropriate

jurisdictional

foregoing, by June 21, 2018.

allegations,

consistent

with

the

Failure to do so will result in the

entry of an Order dismissing this case for lack of jurisdiction.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 12th day
of June, 2018.

4