Bogan v. Kawasaki Motors Corporation USA

Filing 7

OPINION AND ORDER re 6 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Kawasaki Motors Corporation USA filed by Plaintiff William Bogan. Plaintiff ORDERED to filed an Amended Complaint forthwith that properly articulates each party's state of citizenship. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 8/30/13. (cer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
WILLIAM BOGAN,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
KAWASAKI MOTORS CORPORATION,
USA,
Defendant.

CAUSE NO. 1:13-CV-256

OPINION AND ORDER
This case was filed by Plaintiff William Bogan based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (Docket # 1.) Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint
alleging that “[a]t all relevant times, Plaintiff William Bogan was a resident of Huntington
County, Indiana, and is a citizen of the United States.” (Am. Compl. ¶ 1.)
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, however, is inadequate for purposes of establishing
diversity jurisdiction. As explained in this Court’s Order dated August 28, 2013 (Docket # 4),
the “residency” of the Plaintiff is meaningless for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, as state
“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)
An individual’s state of citizenship “is the state of the individual’s domicile.” Galva
Foundry Co. v. Heiden, 924 F.2d 729, 730 (7th Cir. 1991); see Dausch v. Rykse, 9 F.3d 1244,
1245 (7th Cir. 1993) (“For natural persons, state citizenship is determined by one’s domicile.”);
see also Heinen v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 671 F.3d 669, 670 (7th Cir. 2012) (“But residence
1

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.”).
For this reason, Plaintiff is ORDERED to filed an amended complaint forthwith that
properly articulates each party’s state of citizenship.
SO ORDERED.
Enter for this 30th day of August, 2013.
/S/ Roger B. Cosbey
Roger B. Cosbey,
United States Magistrate Judge

2