GAITHER v. SHIDLER et al
ENTRY ON JURISDICTION - Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement that establishes the Court's jurisdiction over this case. This statement should specifically identify the citizenship of Defendants Baldwin & Lyons, Inc., and Gypsum Express, LTD. This jurisdictional statement is due fourteen (14) days from the date of this Entry. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/15/2017. (MAT)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
NEW ALBANY DIVISION
TROY J. SHIDLER,
GYPSUM EXPRESS, LTD,
BALDWIN & LYONS, INC.,
Case No. 4:17-cv-00084-TWP-DML
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 the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The
Complaint alleges 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 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”).
The citizenship of a corporation is “both the state of incorporation and the state in which
the corporation has its principal place of business.” Westfield Ins. Co. v. Kuhns, 2011 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 138262, at *3 (S.D. Ind. Nov. 30, 2011). The Complaint asserts that Defendant Baldwin &
Lyons, Inc., “was a corporation qualified to do business in Hamilton County, Indiana.” (Filing
No. 1 at 2.) This jurisdictional allegation does not establish the citizenship of Defendant Baldwin
& Lyons, Inc., because it fails to allege the state of incorporation and the principal place of
Further, “[f]or diversity jurisdiction purposes, the citizenship of an LLC is the citizenship
of each of its members.” Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007).
“Consequently, 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.” Id. The same is true of partnerships. “A
limited partnership is a citizen of every state of which any partner, general or limited, is a citizen.”
America’s Best Inns, Inc. v. Best Inns of Abilene, L.P., 980 F.2d 1072, 1073 (7th Cir. 1992).
The Complaint states “Defendant, Gypsum Express, LTD… is a corporation qualified to
do business in Jasper County, Indiana.” (Filing No. 1 at 2.) This jurisdictional allegation does not
establish the citizenship of Defendant Gypsum Express, LTD., because the identity and citizenship
of each of the members of the Defendant limited company is necessary for this Court to determine
whether it has jurisdiction.
Therefore, Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement that
establishes the Court’s jurisdiction over this case. This statement should specifically identify the
citizenship of Defendants Baldwin & Lyons, Inc., and Gypsum Express, LTD. This jurisdictional
statement is due fourteen (14) days from the date of this Entry.
John Andrew White
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?