Allen v. Love's Travel Stops & Country Stores, Inc. et al
OPINION AND ORDER: Defendants are ORDERED to supplement the record by filing an amended notice of removal on or before 2/23/2017, that properly alleges the citizenship of the parties. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan L Collins on 2/9/2017. (lhc)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
LOVE’S TRAVEL STOPS &
COUNTRY STORES, INC., et al., )
CASE NO: 1:17-cv-00052-PPS-SLC
OPINION AND ORDER
This case was removed to this Court from the Allen County Superior Court by
Defendants based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (DE 1). The Notice of
Removal alleges that at the time the action was commenced Plaintiff Barbara Allen “was a
resident of Payne, Ohio, making her a citizen of Ohio for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1332.” (DE 1
¶ 4). The Notice of Removal alleges similarly as to Defendant Steve Witzman with respect to
his being an Indiana resident. (DE 1 ¶ 6).
Residency, however, is meaningless for purposes of diversity jurisdiction; an individual’s
citizenship is determined by his or her domicile. See Winforge, Inc. v. Coachmen Indus., Inc.,
691 F.3d 856, 867 (7th Cir. 2012); 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.”); Guar.
Nat’l Title Co., Inc. 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).
Therefore, Defendants are ORDERED to supplement the record by filing an amended
notice of removal on or before February 23, 2017, that properly alleges the citizenship of the
Entered this 9th day of February 2017.
/s/ Susan Collins
United States Magistrate Judge
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?