Masters et al v. Howmedica Osteonics Corporation

Filing 3

OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING 1 Complaint because it fails to properly allege diversity jurisdiction and with leave to amend so as to properly allege the citizenship of each party. ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 9/22/2014. (kds)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
CATHERINE MASTERS and KEVIN
MASTERS
Plaintiffs,
v.
HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS
CORPORATION,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 3:14-cv-1890 JD

OPINION AND ORDER
The Plaintiffs, Catherine Masters and Kevin Masters, filed their complaint in this matter
on September 12, 2014, asserting a number of claims that arise under state law. They seek to
invoke the Court’s diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), which grants this Court
jurisdiction over actions between “citizens of different States.” They allege that the defendant,
Howmedica Osteonics Corporation, is a corporation incorporated in and with its principal place
of business in New Jersey. The complaint further alleges that Catherine Masters “is a resident of
the State of Michigan,” and that Kevin Masters “is her husband.”
However, 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); 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.”). Here, the complaint only alleges Catherine Masters’ residency, not
her citizenship, and only alleges Kevin Masters’ marital status, so it fails to properly allege
diversity jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the complaint with leave to amend so as to properly
allege the citizenship of each party.

SO ORDERED.
ENTERED: September 22, 2014

/s/ JON E. DEGUILIO
Judge
United States District Court

2