Schaefer et al v. Universal Scaffolding & Equipment, LLC

Filing 142

For the reasons explained in the attached ORDER, Defendant Brand Energy Services, LLC, shall remedy the defects in its jurisdictional memorandum at or before the close of business today, January 9, 2014. Signed by Judge Michael J. Reagan on 1/9/2014. (jls)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
MATTHEW SCHAEFER & CYNTHIA
SCHAEFER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
UNIVERSAL SCAFFOLDING & EQUP.,
LLC; BRAND ENERGY SERVS., LLC; &
DYNEGY MIDWEST GENERATION,
LLC;
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 10–cv–0791–MJR–PMF

ORDER
REAGAN, District Judge:
Due to a lack of clarity regarding federal subject matter jurisdiction over this case, the Court
ordered a round of short briefing regarding the citizenship of the parties. Most concerning was the
citizenship of Defendant Dynegy Midwest Generation, LLC (“Dynegy”), whose membership was
unclear from the pleadings.
Dynegy filed a helpful brief showing it is an LLC, the membership of which comprises only
one other LLC, the membership of which (in turn) comprises a single LLC, which is in turn solely
owned by a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Texas. For the purposes of
diversity jurisdiction, Dynegy is therefore a citizen of both Delaware and Texas. See Camico Mut.

Ins. Co. v. Citizens Bank , 474 F.3d 989, 992 (7th Cir. 2007); Smoot v. Mazda Motors of Am.,
Inc. , 469 F.3d 675, 676 (7th Cir. 2006). Because Plaintiffs both enjoy Illinois citizenship, 1 there is

Plaintiffs’ supplemental briefing proclaims they are both Illinois “residents” who “believe” Defendant Universal
Scaffolding is a citizen of Tennessee. Plaintiffs are reminded: Seventh Circuit precedent clearly requires more to
establish citizenship. Winforge, Inc. v. Coachmen Indus., Inc. , 691 F.3d 856, 867 (7th Cir. 2012) (establishing

1

1

diversity between Plaintiffs and Dynegy. Further, it was clear from the Notice of Removal that
Defendant Universal Scaffolding & Equipment, LLC, enjoys Tennessee citizenship. (Doc. 2, 2). So
far, so good.
But Defendant Brand Energy Services’ (“Brand’s”) memorandum lacks the information
required for the Court to determine Brand’s citizenship. Brand is an LLC whose citizenship
depends on its members. And Brand has only one member: another LLC, Brand Scaffold Services.
Brand Scaffold, in turn, is “managed” by a Board of Managers which currently consists of only one
individual who “resides” in Georgia. Residency does not suffice to establish citizenship, Winforge,

Inc. v. Coachmen Indus., Inc. , 691 F.3d 856, 867 (7th Cir. 2012), and it remains unclear just who
are the members (not the managers) of Brand Scaffold, see Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC , 487
F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007) (“[A]n LLC’s jurisdictional statement must identify the
citizenship of each of its members … and if those members have members, the citizenship
of those members as well.”).
Brand is accordingly ORDERED to remedy those defects by filing another jurisdictional
statement (not to exceed one page) before the close of business on January 9, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Michael J. Reagan
MICHAEL J. REAGAN
United States District Judge

DATE: January 9, 2014

citizenship requires domicile, not residence); Med. Assur. Co., Inc. v. H ellman , 610 F.3d 371, 376 (7th Cir.
2010) (alleging citizenship on the “best of … knowledge and belief” insufficient). The error is harmless, though.
The Notice of Removal clearly alleges Plaintiffs’ Illinois citizenship, and contains no hedging language to muddle the
matter (Doc. 2, 1).

2