Sweis v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM Order: Plaintiff Sweis counsel is granted until November 18,2013 to cure the two categories of deficiencies identified in this memorandum order through an appropriate amendment to the Complaint, failing which this Court would be constrained to dismiss both the Complaint and this action for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 11/1/2013:Mailed notice(clw, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
NICHOLAS SWEIS, etc.,
Plaintiff,
v.
TRAVELERS CASUALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No.

13 C 7175

MEMORANDUM ORDER
This Court has just belatedly received from counsel for
plaintiff Nicholas Sweis, as trustee of the Sweis Living Trust
(“Sweis”), a chambers copy of the Complaint in this action.1
This memorandum order is issued sua sponte because of two
problematic aspects of the Complaint.
Sweis invokes federal subject matter jurisdiction in
diversity of citizenship terms, and for the most part the
Complaint’s allegations are unexceptionable in that respect.
There are, however, two deficiencies:
1.

Because Complaint ¶1 identifies Sweis as a co-

trustee, the statutorily required identification of the
citizenship of all relevant parties calls for him to specify
the other co-trustee or co-trustees, coupled with
information about the state or states of citizenship

1

That delivery was accompanied by a check for $100,
payable to the Clerk of Court, because of counsel’s noncompliance
with this District Court’s LR 5.2(f) and with this Court’s
website addressing the requirements of that LR.

involved.
2. Even more importantly, Complaint ¶3 alleges this as
to one of the several codefendants:
Upon information and belief, defendant Overman
Insurance Agency, LLC ("Overman"), is a limited
liability company organized under Oklahoma law,
with its principal place of business located at
117 South Broadway Street, Cleveland, Oklahoma
74020....
Although Complaint ¶3 goes on to state that “Overman is not
a citizen of Illinois,” the above-quoted language renders that
assertion suspect.

What is alleged in the quoted language is a

total irrelevancy when it comes to the relevant citizenship of
any limited liability company, for it says nothing at all about
the citizenship of Overman’s members.

And as taught by a host of

cases such as Wise v. Wachovia Sec., LLC, 450 F.3d 265, 267 (7th
Cir. 2006):
The citizenship for diversity purposes of a
limited liability company, however, despite
the resemblance of such a company to a
corporation (the hallmark of both being
limited liability), is the citizenship of
each of its members.
This Court ordinarily dismisses complaints (without
prejudice, of course) that have made the mistake just referred
to, because a plaintiff who seeks to invoke diversity
jurisdiction has the affirmative obligation to do so properly.
But because Complaint ¶1 identifies Sweis as a South Carolina
citizen, it seems unlikely that the necessary identification of

2

Sweis’ co-trustee or co-trustees and of Overman’s members, plus
their respective states of citizenship, would reveal a lack of
total diversity.
Accordingly Sweis’ counsel is granted until November 18,
2013 to cure the two categories of deficiencies identified in
this memorandum order through an appropriate amendment to the
Complaint, failing which this Court would be constrained to
dismiss both the Complaint and this action for lack of federal
subject matter jurisdiction.

________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date:

November 1, 2013

3