Blette v. Taylor et al

Filing 17

ORDER entered by Magistrate Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 3/28/2017. The Court may grant leave to amend defective allegations of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1653. See also, Leaf v. Supreme Court of State of Wis., 979 F.2d 5 89, 595 (7th Cir. 1992) ("leave to amend defective allegations of subject matter jurisdiction should be freely given") (citations omitted). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Intervenor Plaintiff file an Amended Complaint in Interve ntion not later than fourteen (14) days (4/12/2017) from the date of entry of this Order. In the Amended Complaint in Intervention, the Intervenor Plaintiff shall properly allege the basis for the Court's jurisdiction. See full written Order. (RT, ilcd)

E-FILED

Tuesday, 28 March, 2017 11:19:19 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
PEORIA DIVISION
NICHOLAS BLETTE,
Plaintiff,
v.
EDDIE TAYLOR; UNITED VAN
LINES, LLC,
Defendants.

Case No. 1:17-cv-01040-JBM-JEH

CASSENS TRANSPORT
COMPANY,
Intervenor Plaintiff,
v.
EDDIE TAYLOR; UNITED VAN
LINES, LLC,
Intervenor Defendants.

Order
The Intervenor Plaintiff, Cassens Transport Company, filed a Complaint in
Intervention in this case on March 27, 2017. (D. 16) 1 The Intervenor Plaintiff’s Complaint
asserts diversity of citizenship as a basis of this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. (D. 16
at pg. 1). The allegations of the Complaint in Intervention are not sufficient to support
that assertion.
The court may sua sponte raise the issue of federal subject matter jurisdiction. Tylka
v. Gerber Products Co., 211 F.3d 445, 447 (7th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted). Here, the
Intervenor Plaintiff alleges the individual parties are a “resident” of their respective
1

Citations to the Docket in this case are abbreviated as “D. __.”

1

states, that United Van Lines, LLC “is a corporation organized under the laws of the State
of Missouri[,]” and that “Cassens Transport Company is an Illinois corporation.” Id. at
pg. 2.
First, the Seventh Circuit has repeatedly warned that an allegation of residency is
insufficient to invoke federal subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., Tylka v. Gerber Prods.
Co., 211 F.3d 445, 448 (7th Cir.2000); see also Page v. Wright, 116 F2d 449, 451 (7th Cir.
1940) (“[i]n federal law citizenship means domicile, not residence”). Parties asserting
diversity jurisdiction based on parties hailing from different states must allege the
citizenship of each party, not the residence. See Held v. Held, 137 F.3d 998 (7th Cir.1998);
Pollution Control Indus. of Am., Inc. v. Van Gundy, 21 F.3d 152, 155 (7th Cir.1994).
Additionally, a complaint based on diversity jurisdiction must allege the state of
incorporation and principal place of business for each of the named corporations, and
those allegations must be based on the state of things at the time the action was brought.
28 USC § 1332(c)(1); Grupo Dataflux v Atlas Global Group, LP, 541 US 567, 570-71 (2004).
The Court may grant leave to amend defective allegations of subject matter
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1653. See also, Leaf v. Supreme Court of State of Wis.,
979 F.2d 589, 595 (7th Cir. 1992) (“leave to amend defective allegations of subject matter
jurisdiction should be freely given”) (citations omitted).

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that the Intervenor Plaintiff file an Amended Complaint in Intervention not
later than fourteen (14) days from the date of entry of this Order. In the Amended
Complaint in Intervention, the Intervenor Plaintiff shall properly allege the basis for the
Court’s jurisdiction.
It is so ordered.
Entered on March 28, 2017.

s/Jonathan E. Hawley
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2