WELLINGTON v. COOK INCORPORATED

Filing 9

**PLEASE DISREGARD, DOCKETED IN ERROR** ENTRY ON JURISDICTION - Therefore, the Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement that establishes the Court's jurisdiction over this case. This statement should identify the citizenship of Defendant. This jurisdictional statement is due ten (10) days from the date of this Entry. (See Entry.) Copy to Parties via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 12/5/2016.(JLS) Modified on 12/6/2016 (JLS).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
CLEAN FUELS OF INDIANA, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
RIVERPORT INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:16-cv-03119-TWP-MPB

ENTRY ON JURISDICTION
It has come to the Court’s attention that Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to allege all of the facts
necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The
Complaint alleges that this Court has jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. However,
the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of Defendant Riverport Insurance
Company. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional purposes. See Meyerson v.
Harrah’s East Chicago Casino, 299 F.3d 616, 617 (7th Cir. 2002) (“residence and citizenship are
not synonyms and it is the latter that matters for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction”).
Furthermore, jurisdictional allegations must be made on personal knowledge, not on information
and belief, to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of a federal court. See America’s Best Inns,
Inc. v. Best Inns of Abilene, L.P., 980 F.2d 1072, 1074 (7th Cir. 1992) (only a statement about
jurisdiction “made on personal knowledge has any value,” and a statement made “‘to the best of
my knowledge and belief’ is insufficient” to invoke diversity jurisdiction “because it says nothing
about citizenship”); Page v. Wright, 116 F.2d 449, 451 (7th Cir. 1940) (an allegation of a party’s
citizenship for diversity purposes that is “made only upon information and belief” is unsupported).

The Complaint alleges that “[u]pon information and belief, the Defendant, RIVERPORT
INSURANCE COMPANY (“RIVERPORT”), is a corporation organized under the laws of Iowa,
with its principal place of business located at 222 South 9th Street, Suite 2700, Minneapolis,
Minnesota 55402.” (Filing No. 1 at 1.) This allegation made upon information and belief is not
sufficient to allow the Court to determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists.
Therefore, the Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement that
establishes the Court’s jurisdiction over this case. This statement should identify the citizenship of
Defendant. This jurisdictional statement is due ten (10) days from the date of this Entry.
SO ORDERED.

Date: 12/5/2016
Distribution:
E. Scott Treadway
EST LAW, LLC
[e-mail]
John R. Darda
Maslon, Edelman, Borman & Brand, LLP
Suite 3300
90 S 7th St
Minneapolis, MN 55402-4140
Margo S. Brownell
Maslon, Edelman, Borman & Brand, LLP
Suite 3300
90 S 7th St
Minneapolis, MN 55402-4140
Jennifer Erin Hoge
Rissman, Barrett, Hurt, Donahue, McLain & Mangan, PA
201 E Pine St - Ste 1500
PO Box 4940
Orlando, FL 32802-4940

2

John Pendleton Daly
Rissman, Barrett, Hurt, Donahue, McLain & Mangan, PA
201 E Pine St - Ste 1500
PO Box 4940
Orlando, FL 32802-4940
Diana Widjaya
Ver Ploeg & Lumpkin, PA
30th Floor
100 SE 2nd St
Miami, FL 33131-2158
Richard Hugh Lumpkin
Ver Ploeg & Lumpkin, PA
30th Floor
100 SE 2nd St
Miami, FL 33131-2158

3