BAUMANN v. BALASHI et al

Filing 6

ENTRY ON JURISDICTION - On July 6, 2016, the Plaintiff, Douglas E. Baumann, filed a Complaint which failed to allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. Specifically, the Complain t alleges that this Court has jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship, however, the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of the parties. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional purposes. The Complaint alleges that the Plaintiff is a "resident" of Indiana. This allegation of residency is not sufficient to allow the Court to determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists. In addition, the Complaint fails to allege the principal place of b usiness of Defendant S.A. Express, Inc. Further, the Complaint alleges the Defendants' citizenship "upon information and belief." To remedy these deficiencies, the Plaintiff shall file a supplemental jurisdictional statement to suffici ently establish this Court's jurisdiction over this case. The Plaintiff's statement must accurately identify the citizenship of each party and remedy the basis for his jurisdictional allegations. The Plaintiff's supplemental jurisdictional statement is due fourteen (14) days after the date of this entry. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 7/18/2016. (MAG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
NEW ALBANY DIVISION
DOUGLAS E. BAUMANN,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.
AUREL BALASHI,
S.A. EXPRESS, INC.,
Defendants.

No. 4:16-cv-00128-TWP-DML

ENTRY ON JURISDICTION
On July 6, 2016, the Plaintiff, Douglas E. Baumann, filed a Complaint which failed to
allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction
over this case.

Specifically, the Complaint alleges that this Court has jurisdiction based upon

diversity of citizenship, however, the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of the
parties. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional purposes. See Meyerson v.
Harrah’s E. Chi. Casino, 299 F.3d 616, 617 (7th Cir. 2002).
The Complaint alleges that the Plaintiff is a “resident” of Indiana. (Filing No. 1 at 1.) This
allegation of residency is not sufficient to allow the Court to determine whether diversity
jurisdiction exists. See McHanon v. Bunn-O-Matic Corp., 150 F.3d 651, 653 (7th Cir. 1998) (“[a]n
allegation of residence is inadequate”); Meyerson, 299 F.3d at 617 (“residence and citizenship are
not synonyms and it is the latter that matters for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction”). In
addition, the Complaint fails to allege the principal place of business of Defendant S.A. Express,
Inc.
Further, the Complaint alleges the Defendants’ citizenship “upon information and belief.”
(Id.) However, allegations made upon information and belief are not sufficient to allow the Court
1

to determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists. Instead, jurisdictional allegations must be made
on personal knowledge, not on information and belief, to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of
a federal court. See Am.’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).
To remedy these deficiencies, the Plaintiff shall file a supplemental jurisdictional statement
to sufficiently establish this Court’s jurisdiction over this case. The Plaintiff’s statement must
accurately identify the citizenship of each party and remedy the basis for his jurisdictional
allegations. The Plaintiff’s supplemental jurisdictional statement is due fourteen (14) days after
the date of this entry.
SO ORDERED.

Date: 7/18/2016

2

Distribution:
Gregory M. Reger
LORCH NAVILLE WARD LLC
[e-mail]
Matthew J. Schad
SCHAD & SCHAD
[e-mail]

3