Worlds v. Sentry Insurance A Mutual Company

Filing 7

OPINION AND ORDER: defendant ORDERED to supplement the record by filing an Amended Notice of Removal on/before 4/16/12 properly alleging the citizenship of plaintiff Carolyn Worlds. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 4/2/12. (jcp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
CAROLYN WORLDS,
Plaintiff,
v.
SENTRY INSURANCE,
A MUTUAL COMPANY
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CAUSE NO. 1:12-CV-98

OPINION AND ORDER
This case was removed to this Court from the Allen Superior Court by the Defendant
based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (Docket # 2.) The Notice of
Removal alleges that “Plaintiff, Carolyn Worlds, is an Indiana resident with a primary residence
at 3618 Avondale Drive, Fort Wayne, Indiana.” (Notice of Removal ¶ 5.)
Defendant’s Notice of Removal, however, is inadequate because the “residency” of each
party is meaningless for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, as “citizenship is what matters.”
Guar. Nat’l Title Co. v. J.E.G. Assocs., 101 F.3d 57, 58-59 (7th Cir. 1996) (explaining that
statements concerning a party’s “residency” are not proper allegations of citizenship as required
by 28 U.S.C. § 1332); see 28 U.S.C. § 1332. “It is well-settled that when the parties allege
residence but not citizenship, the court must dismiss the suit.” Held v. Held, 137 F.3d 998, 1000
(7th Cir. 1998) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see generally Smoot v. Mazda
Motors of Am., Inc., 469 F.3d 675, 677-78 (7th Cir. 2006). Therefore, as citizenship does not
necessarily equate with residence, Dahlstrom v. Simon, No. 00 C 5189, 2000 WL 1231391, at *1

1

(N.D. Ill. Aug. 28, 2000), alleging that the Plaintiff is an Indiana resident does not establish her
citizenship.
Accordingly, the Court must be advised of Plaintiff Carolyn Worlds’s citizenship, not
residency. “[F]or natural persons, state citizenship is determined by one’s domicile.” Dausch v.
Rykse, 9 F.3d 1244, 1245 (7th Cir. 1993); see also Heinen v. Northrop Grumman Corp., __ F.3d
__, 2012 WL 372988, at *1 (7th Cir. Feb. 7, 2012) (“But residence may or may not demonstrate
citizenship, which depends on domicile—that is to say, the state in which a person intends to live
over the long run.”); Am.’s Best Inns, Inc., 980 F.2d at 1074 (“In federal law citizenship means
domicile, not residence.”).
Therefore, Defendant is ORDERED to supplement the record by filing an Amended
Notice of Removal on or before April 16, 2012, properly alleging the citizenship of Plaintiff
Carolyn Worlds.
SO ORDERED.
Enter for this 2nd day of April, 2012.
/S/ Roger B. Cosbey
Roger B. Cosbey,
United States Magistrate Judge

2