Madison Mutual Insurance Company v. Diamond State Insurance Company

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: jurisictional defect. Amended complaint due by 6/6/2014. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 5/21/2014. (jdh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
MADISON MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 14-cv-565-JPG-PMF
vs.
DIAMOND STATE INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on its own initiative for purposes of case
management. Specifically, the Court questions whether it has jurisdiction over this matter.
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They may exercise jurisdiction only over
matters authorized by the Constitution and by statute. Turner/Ozanne v. Hyman/Power, 111
F.3d 1312, 1316 (7th Cir. 1997). Moreover, federal courts must police the boundaries of their
own jurisdiction. Even absent an objection by a party challenging jurisdiction, they are “obliged
to inquire sua sponte whenever a doubt arises as to the existence of federal jurisdiction.” Tylka
v. Gerber Prods. Co., 211 F.3d 445, 448-49 (7th Cir. 2000) (quoting Mt. Healthy City Bd. of
Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 278 (1977)). As such, this Court conducts a rigorous initial review
of complaints to ensure that jurisdiction has been properly pled.
In its complaint (Doc. 2), plaintiff Madison Mutual Insurance Company has invoked but
not properly pled diversity of citizenship as a basis of federal jurisdiction. Federal courts have
jurisdiction over a civil action between citizens of different states. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1)
(2006). “For the purposes of [§ 1332(c)] . . . , a corporation shall be deemed a citizen of any
State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of

business.” Se. Guar. Trust Co., Ltd. v. Rodman & Renshaw, Inc., 358 F. Supp. 1001, 1005-1006
(N.D. Ill. 1973) (emphasis added). Here, plaintiff has failed to allege the parties’ states of
incorporation and principal places of business.
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS plaintiff to file an amended complaint correcting these
and any other jurisdictional defects by June 6, 2014. See Tylka, 211 F.3d at 448 (“[I]t is not the
court’s obligation to lead counsel through a jurisdictional paint-by-numbers scheme.”). Should it
fail to do so, the Court will dismiss this matter for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 21, 2014

s/ J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE

2