Fernandez Ramirez v. N and M Transfer Co., Inc. et al

Filing 25

OPINION AND ORDER TAKING UNDER ADVISEMENT 24 MOTION Defendants' Unopposed Motion for Leave to Join Party and File Amended Counterclaim by Counter Claimants Gary J. Hoefs, N and M Transfer Co., Inc. The Court SETS a deadline of 1/20/2021 by which Defendants may file a supplemental jurisdictional statement containing proper allegations as to the citizenship of Prestige Transport, LLC, as outlined in Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joshua P Kolar on 1/6/2021. (lhc)

USDC IN/ND case 2:20-cv-00213-JPK document 25 filed 01/06/21 page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
HAMMOND DIVISION
MANAIN FERNANDEZ RAMIREZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
N AND M TRANSFER CO., INC., and
GARY J. HOEFS,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CAUSE NO.: 2:20-CV-213-JPK

OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Unopposed Motion for Leave to Join Party
and File Amended Counterclaim [DE 24], filed by Defendants N & M Transfer Co., Inc. and Gary
J. Hoefs on December 29, 2020. In the instant motion, Defendants seek leave to file an Amended
Counterclaim joining Plaintiff Manain Fernandez Ramirez’s employer, Prestige Transport, LLC,
as a counter-defendant to this matter. Defendants represent that Plaintiff does not object to the
requested relief.
Per the Complaint filed at Docket Entry 1, the Court’s June 4, 2020 Opinion and Order at
Docket Entry 7, and Plaintiff’s jurisdictional statement filed at Docket Entry 8, the Court has
subject matter jurisdiction over this matter via diversity jurisdiction. On the allegations in
Defendants’ Amended Counterclaim, the Court is unable to determine whether the addition of
Prestige Transport, LLC as a party to this matter would destroy diversity.
For the Court to have diversity jurisdiction, no defendant may be a citizen of the same state
as any plaintiff, and the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Per
the Complaint and Plaintiff’s jurisdictional statement, Plaintiff is a citizen of Cuba, Defendants
N & M Transfer Co., Inc. and Gary J. Hoefs are citizens of Wisconsin, and the amount in
controversy exceeds $75,000. The proposed Amended Counterclaim states that Prestige

USDC IN/ND case 2:20-cv-00213-JPK document 25 filed 01/06/21 page 2 of 3

Transport, LLC “is owned by Almir Duric,” who “is a citizen of the State of Michigan.” (Mot.
Ex. A ¶¶ 4-5, ECF No. 24-1). These allegations are insufficient for the purpose of determining
citizenship.
A limited liability company’s citizenship “for purposes of . . . diversity jurisdiction is the
citizenship of its members.” Cosgrove v. Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir. 1998). Therefore,
if a party is a limited liability company or partnership, the Court must be advised of the identity of
each of its members or partners and advised of each member’s or partner’s citizenship. Thomas v.
Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007) (“an LLC’s jurisdictional statement must
identify the citizenship of each of its members as of the date the complaint or notice of removal
was filed, and, if those members have members, the citizenship of those members as well.”). It is
not sufficient to broadly allege that all members of a limited liability company or partners of a
partnership are citizens of a particular state. See Thomas, 487 F.3d at 533-34 (“blanket declaration”
that an LLC’s member(s) “are citizens of another state,” and “naked declaration that there is
diversity of citizenship,” are both insufficient); Guar. Nat’l Title Co. v. J.E.G. Assocs., 101 F.3d
57, 59 (7th Cir. 1996) (explaining that the court would “need to know the name and citizenship(s)”
of each partner for diversity jurisdiction purposes). Moreover, citizenship must be “traced through
multiple levels” for those members who are a partnership or a limited liability company,
as anything less can result in a remand for want of jurisdiction. Mut. Assignment & Indem. Co. v.
Lind-Waldock & Co., LLC, 364 F.3d 858, 861 (7th Cir. 2004).
The Court acknowledges Defendants’ allegation that Prestige Transport, LLC is “owned
by Almir Duric,” who is alleged to be a Michigan citizen. (Mot. Ex. A ¶¶ 4-5, ECF No. 24-1).
While this allegation may have intended to convey that Prestige Transport, LLC is wholly owned
by Almir Duric and thus has only one member, this is not made explicitly clear. Accordingly, given

2

USDC IN/ND case 2:20-cv-00213-JPK document 25 filed 01/06/21 page 3 of 3

the importance of determining the Court’s jurisdiction to hear this case, Defendants must identify
all members of Prestige Transport, LLC, and properly allege the citizenship of each such member.
Accordingly, the Court hereby TAKES UNDER ADVISEMENT Defendants’
Unopposed Motion for Leave to Join Party and File Amended Counterclaim [DE 24]. The Court
SETS a deadline of January 20, 2021 by which Defendants may file a supplemental jurisdictional
statement containing proper allegations as to the citizenship of Prestige Transport, LLC. In the
absence of such a statement, or if such statement is insufficient, the Court will deny Defendants’
motion.
So ORDERED this 6th day of January, 2021.
s/ Joshua P. Kolar
MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOSHUA P. KOLAR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3