State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. et al v. General Motors LLC

Filing 7

JURISDICTIONAL ORDER: Plaintiffs are ORDERED to file a first amended complaint, on or before July 1, 2015, clearly setting forth all of the information needed to determine whether jurisdiction lies in this Court. See attached order for specifics. Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 6/10/15. (klh2)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY
CO. and
STATE FARM MUTUAL
ATUOMOBILE INSURANCE CO.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
GENERAL MOTORS, LLC,
Defendant.

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

Case No. 15-CV-626-NJR-SCW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ROSENSTENGEL, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court sua sponte on the issue of federal subject matter
jurisdiction. See Foster v. Hill, 497 F.3d 695, 696-97 (7th Cir. 2007) (“It is the responsibility
of a court to make an independent evaluation of whether subject matter jurisdiction
exists in every case.”). Plaintiffs assert that this Court has original jurisdiction over the
action based on the complete diversity of the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Doc. 1).
Unfortunately, Plaintiffs’ allegations regarding citizenship are insufficient.
The complaint states that Plaintiffs, State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. and State
Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., “are both entities of State Farm Insurance, a
corporation with its principal place of business . . . [in] Illinois.” (Doc. 1). In other words,
the complaint attributes the citizenship of State Farm Insurance to the Plaintiffs. The
citizenship of a parent company, however, generally is not attributed to its wholly
owned subsidiaries or related entities, unless the subsidiary or related entity is the alter
Page 1 of 3

ego of the parent company. Bond v. Veolia Water Indianapolis, LLC, 571 F. Supp. 2d 905, 913
(S.D. Ind. 2008); Goel v. Patni Computer Sys., Inc., No. 07-CV-1034, 2008 WL 4185691, at *5
n.1 (C.D. Ill. Sept. 8, 2008); CIGNA HealthCare of St. Louis, Inc. v. Kaiser, 181 F. Supp. 2d
914, 920 n.8 (N.D. Ill. 2002). The simple allegation that Plaintiffs “are both entities of State
Farm Insurance” is insufficient to establish that they are the alter egos of State Farm
Insurance. Even if that were not true, the allegation regarding the citizenship of State
Farm Insurance is incomplete because it identifies the state in which its principal place of
business is located but not the state in which it is incorporated. See Pastor v. State Farm
Mut. Auto. Ins. Co, 487 F.3d 1042, 1047 (7th Cir. 2007).
With regard to Defendant, General Motors, LLC, the complaint alleges only that it
“had its principal place of business . . . [in] Michigan.” If GM was a corporation, this
allegation would be incomplete because, again, it only names the state where the
principal place of business is located but not the state in which it was incorporated.
According to the complaint, however, GM is not a corporation; it is as a limited liability
company (“LLC”). The citizenship of an LLC for diversity purposes is the citizenship of
each of its members. See, e.g., Copeland v. Penske Logistics, LLC, 675 F.3d 1040, 1043 (7th
Cir. 2012). “Consequently, an LLC’s jurisdictional statement must identify the
citizenship of each of its members as of the date the complaint or notice of removal was
filed, and, if those members have members, the citizenship of those members as well.”
Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007).
Accordingly, Plaintiffs are ORDERED to file a first amended complaint, on or
before July 1, 2015, clearly setting forth all of the information needed to determine

Page 2 of 3

whether jurisdiction lies in this Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 10, 2015
s/ Nancy J. Rosenstengel
NANCY J. ROSENSTENGEL
United States District Judge

Page 3 of 3