Sanders v. Stuhr, Jr. et al
ORDER DISMISSING CASE Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MBea)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Case No. 17-12959
HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH
DENNIS STUHR JR., et al.,
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
Plaintiff Charles Sanders filed a complaint against defendants Dennis
Stuhr Jr., Archrock Services, Limited Partnership, and Geico Indemnity
Company on September 8, 2017. (Doc. 1). The complaint states that this
action arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
28 U.S.C. § 1332 grants district courts original jurisdiction of “all civil
actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of
$75,000, exclusive of interests and costs, and is between – (1) citizens of
different states.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). For the purposes of § 1332(a), courts
have interpreted Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. 267 (1806) to require
complete diversity between all plaintiffs and all defendants. See e.g.,
Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 829 (1989); U.S.
Motors v. General Motors Europe, 551 F.3d 420, 423 (6th Cir. 2008).
The complaint states that plaintiff and defendant Stuhr are Michigan
citizens. The parties are, therefore, not completely diverse. The Court
issued an Order to Show Cause, (Doc. 5), regarding this issue as well as
the unknown citizenship of defendant Archrock Services. Plaintiff filed a
response on October 2, 2017. (Doc. 6). It addressed the citizenship of
Archrock Services and Geico, but neglected to state why the case should
not be dismissed in light of plaintiff and Stuhr’s common Michigan
citizenship. No defendant has filed a response.
The Court therefore ORDERS the instant case IS DISMISSED for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 26, 2017
s/George Caram Steeh
GEORGE CARAM STEEH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on
October 26, 2017, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
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?