Bozeman v. Life Insurance Company of North America

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM ORDER: Counsel for Life Insurance Co of North America is directed to promptly provide the companys citizenship information to counsel for Plaintiff, who must then file by September 10, 2010 a Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint to s et forth the requisite citizenship information with specificity. The motion must comply with Local Rule 7.6W, including the requirement of a statement regarding consent of opposing counsel. The court will review the amended pleading and, if jurisdiction is established, set the case for a scheduling conference. (Compliance Deadline set for 9/10/2010). Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark L Hornsby on 8/25/10. (crt,Smith, C)

- M L H Bozeman v. Life Insurance Co of North America

Doc. 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W E S T E R N DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA S H R E V E P O R T DIVISION

K Y L E ALAN BOZEMAN V ER SU S L IF E INSURANCE CO. OF NORTH A M E R IC A

C IV IL ACTION NO. 10-cv-0973 J U D G E HICKS M A G I S T R A T E JUDGE HORNSBY

M E M O R A N D U M ORDER P la in t if f , who alleges that he is domiciled in Louisiana, filed this complaint against L if e Insurance Company of North America ("LINA") based on an assertion of diversity ju ris d ic tio n . Plaintiff describes LINA as "a foreign insurance company authorized and doing b u sin e ss in this state ... ." LINA, in its answer, admitted that allegation, and stated that it d o e s not contest subject matter jurisdiction, but it did not provide additional information a b o u t its citizenship. A corporation is deemed to be a citizen of (1) the state in which it was incorporated a n d (2) the state where it has its principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). To e s ta b l is h diversity jurisdiction, a complaint must set forth "with specificity" a corporate p a rty's state of incorporation and its principal place of business. "Where the plaintiff [or re m o v in g party] fails to state the place of incorporation or the principal place of business of a corporate party, the pleadings are inadequate to establish diversity." Joiner v. Diamond M D rillin g Co., 677 F.2d 1035, 1039 (5th Cir. 1982). The Fifth Circuit requires strict adherence to these straightforward rules. Howery v. Allstate Ins. Co., 243 F.3d 912, 919 (5th Cir. 2001).

Dockets.Justia.com

P la in tif f , as the party invoking the jurisdiction of the court, bears the burden of setting f o r th the facts necessary to establish diversity. Counsel for LINA should have ready access to information to determine the state in which LINA is incorporated and where it has its p r i n c ip a l place of business (assuming it is a corporation and not another form of business e n tity). (At least one reported decision stated that LINA was a Pennsylvania corporation w ith its principal place of business in Pennsylvania.) Counsel for LINA is directed to p r o m p t ly provide the company's citizenship information to counsel for Plaintiff, who must th e n file by September 10, 2010 a Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint to set forth th e requisite citizenship information with specificity. The motion must comply with Local R u le 7.6W, including the requirement of a statement regarding consent of opposing counsel. T h e court will review the amended pleading and, if jurisdiction is established, set the case f o r a scheduling conference. All counsel are encourage to, when filing a complaint, notice of removal, answer or o th e r pleading in a diversity case, ensure that the citizenship of the parties is alleged with p a rtic u la rity and in accordance with the rules that apply to the person or entity involved. THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 25th day of August, 2010.

Page 2 of 2