Lyons v. Jacko et al
Filing
5
OPINION AND ORDER: Pla ORDERED to supplement the record on or before 12/15/2014, by filing an amended complaint that properly recites each Defendant's citizenship. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 12/1/2014. (lhc)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
DENISE L. LYONS,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
ARMAND E. JACKO, et al.,
Defendants.
Cause No. 1:14-cv-376
OPINION and ORDER
This case was filed in this Court on November 26, 2014, based on diversity jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (Docket # 1.) The complaint alleges that at all material times
Plaintiff Denise Lyons was a citizen of Michigan and that Defendant Armand Jacko was a citizen
of Michigan. The complaint, however, fails to adequately articulate the citizenship of the other
six Defendants.
For Defendants Now Delivery LLC, Now Delivery, Now Delivery of Grand Rapids LLC,
and Now Delivery Trucking LLC, the complaint recites that each Defendant “is a Michigan
limited liability company with its principal place of business in the State of Michigan, City of
Grand Rapids.” (Compl. ¶¶ 4-7.) But this information is irrelevant for determining the
citizenship of an LLC for diversity jurisdiction. “[T]he citizenship of a limited liability company
[‘LLC’] for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction is the citizenship of its members.” Cosgrove v.
Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, citizenship for each of these entities
must be “traced through multiple levels” of its members, as anything less can result in a
dismissal or remand for want of jurisdiction. Mut. Assignment & Indem. Co. v. Lind-Waldock &
Co., LLC, 364 F.3d 858, 861 (7th Cir. 2004).
And as to Defendant Now Delivery and Logistics LLC, the complaint recites that it is “a
Michigan corporation with its principal place of business in the State of Michigan, City of Grand
Rapids.” (Compl. ¶ 3.) But this Defendant’s name includes “LLC,” suggesting that it is, in fact,
a LLC rather than a corporation. If so, then the citizenship of its members needs to be traced
through multiple levels. See id.
Finally, the complaint alleges that Defendant The Hartford Insurance Company “is a
company doing business in Lexington, Kentucky.” (Compl. ¶ 8.) This recitation is also
inadequate, as it fails to identify whether this Defendant is a corporation or LLC. And in either
event, where the entity “do[es] business” is irrelevant. If Hartford is an LLC, then as explained
earlier, the citizenship of each of its members must be alleged. Mut. Assignment & Indem. Co.,
364 F.3d at 861. But if Hartford is a corporation, the complaint must recite its state of
incorporation and state in which its principal place of business is located, as corporations “are
deemed to be citizens of the state in which they are incorporated and the state in which they have
their principal place of business.” N. Trust Co. v. Bunge Corp., 899 F.2d 591, 594 (7th Cir.
1990); see 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1).
Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to supplement the record on or before December 15,
2014, by filing an amended complaint that properly recites each Defendant’s citizenship.
SO ORDERED.
Enter for this 1st day of December 2014.
/s/ Roger B. Cosbey
Roger B. Cosbey
United States Magistrate Judge
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?