Wyse v. Rock-Tenn CP, LLC

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant shall have until September 17, 2012, to file an amended notice of removal setting forth facts establishing jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship. Response to Court due by 9/17/2012. Signed by District Judge Carol E. Jackson on 9/7/12. (KJS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
REGINA G. WYSE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
ROCKTENN CP, LLC,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:12-CV-1489 (CEJ)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court for a determination of whether subject-matter
jurisdiction exists. See City of Kansas City, Mo. v. Yarco Co., Inc., 625 F.3d 1038,
1040 (8th Cir. 2010) (federal courts have independent duty to determine subject
matter jurisdiction).
On July 6, 2012, plaintiff Regina Wyse filed this action in the Twenty-First
Judicial Circuit Court of Missouri (St. Louis County), asserting claims of sex and age
discrimination against defendant RockTenn CP, LLC. On August 20, 2012, defendant
removed the matter to this Court, asserting jurisdiction based on diversity of
citizenship. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441(a).
Diversity jurisdiction exists in cases in which the amount in controversy exceeds
$75,000, exclusive of interest and costs,1 and the citizenship of each plaintiff is diverse
from the citizenship of each defendant. 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The party seeking removal
has the burden to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction. Central Iowa Power

1

The amount-in-controversy requirement is satisfied: plaintiff seeks actual
damages for past and future lost income and compensatory damages for emotional
pain, suffering, humiliation, fear, anxiety, dread, inconvenience, mental anguish, and
loss of enjoyment of life. She also seeks punitive damages, attorney’s fees and costs.

Co-op. v. Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., 561 F.3d 904 (8th
Cir. 2009). All doubts about federal jurisdiction must be resolved in favor of remand.
In re Business Men’s Assur. Co. of America, 992 F.2d 181, 183 (8th Cir. 1993). In the
event that the federal court determines it does not have subject-matter jurisdiction
over a removed action, it must remand the action to the state court where it
originated. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).
A removal notice must make the basis for federal jurisdiction clear and contain
enough information so that the court can determine whether jurisdiction exists. 14C
Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice and Procedure § 3733 (4th ed. 2009). A
notice of removal that fails to contain an allegation of a defendant corporation’s dual
citizenship -- the state of incorporation and the state of its principal place of business
-- is defective when diversity is the basis for removal. Id.

Because defendant is a

limited liability company, the Court must examine the citizenship of each of the
defendant’s members to determine whether there is diversity. GMAC Comm. Credit,
LLC v. Dillard Dep’t Stores, Inc., 357 F.3d 827, 829 (8th Cir. 2004). In the removal
notice, the plaintiff is alleged to be a Missouri citizen and defendant states that it is a
limited liability company organized under the laws of Delaware with its principal place
of business in Georgia. Defendant does not identify its members nor the state(s) of
which they are citizens. Thus, the notice of removal does not allege sufficient facts to
establish diversity jurisdiction.
The defendant will be given the opportunity to file an amended notice of removal
setting forth facts to establish jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship.
jurisdiction cannot be established, this action will be remanded to the state court.
Accordingly,

If

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant shall have until September 17,
2012, to file an amended notice of removal setting forth facts establishing jurisdiction
based on diversity of citizenship.

____________________________
CAROL E. JACKSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 7th day of September, 2012.