IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company d/b/a Ameriprise Auto & Home Insurance v. Scudder et al

Filing 4

ORDER entered by Magistrate Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 3/29/2017. 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 Plaintiff file an Amended Complaint not later than fourteen (14) days (4/13/2017) from the date of entry of this Order. In the Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff shall properly allege the basis for the Court's jurisdiction. See full written Order.(RT, ilcd)

E-FILED

Wednesday, 29 March, 2017 09:55:39 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
PEORIA DIVISION
IDS PROPERTY CASUALTY
INSURANCE COMPANY d/b/a
AMERIPRISE AUTO & HOME
INSURANCE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 1:17-cv-01130-JES-JEH

ROBERT F. SCUDDER; JENNIFER L.
SMITH; JENNIFER L. SCUDDER,
Defendants.

Order
The Plaintiff, IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company, filed a Complaint
in this case on March 28, 2017. (D. 1) 1 The Plaintiff’s Complaint asserts diversity
of citizenship as a basis of this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. Id. at pg. 1. The
allegations of the Complaint 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 Plaintiff alleges its principal place of business is in Wisconsin and that it
“is qualified to do business in Illinois as a foreign corporation.” Id.
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

1

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

1

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 Plaintiff file an Amended Complaint
not later than fourteen (14) days from the date of entry of this Order. In the
Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff shall properly allege the basis for the Court’s
jurisdiction.
It is so ordered.
Entered on March 29, 2017.

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

2