Blevins v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company

Filing 5

OPINION AND ORDER re 2 NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company. Defendant ORDERED to file an Amended Notice of Removal by 10/9/2012 properly alleging the citizenship of Plaintiff Brian Blevins. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 9/24/12. (cer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
BRIAN BLEVINS,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY
INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.

CAUSE NO. 1:12-CV-329

OPINION AND ORDER
This case was removed to this Court from the Blackford Superior Court by Defendant
based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (Docket # 2.) The Notice of
Removal alleges that Plaintiff Brian Blevins “is a resident of Blackford County, Indiana,” and
that “[a]ccordingly, pursuant to federal law, Plaintiff is considered to be a citizen of the State of
Indiana.” (Notice of Removal ¶ 8.)
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 Plaintiff Brian Blevins is a citizen of the State of Indiana
simply because he is a resident of Indiana is insufficient.
Therefore, the Court must be advised of the citizenship of Plaintiff Blevins. “For 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., 671 F.3d 669, 670 (7th Cir. 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. v. Best
Inns of Abilene, L.P., 980 F.2d 1072, 1074 (7th Cir. 1992) (“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 October 9, 2012, properly alleging the citizenship of Plaintiff
Brian Blevins.
SO ORDERED.
Enter for this 24th day of September, 2012.
/S/ Roger B. Cosbey
Roger B. Cosbey,
United States Magistrate Judge

2