Halilovic v. Krinninger

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall submit a revised amended complaint no later than August 21, 2017. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Rule 16 scheduling conference set for Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 9:30 a.m. is VACATED . If necessary, I will reschedule the conference and give the parties an opportunity to submit a revised joint proposed scheduling plan in a separate order following my decision on Plaintiffs Motion to File an Amended Petition.. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 8/14/17. (LGK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
HAMDIJA HALILOVIC,
Plaintiff,
v.
KAITLYN KRINNINGER,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:17 CV 01794 RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Upon review of Plaintiff’s Motion to File an Amended Petition [8] and
proposed Amended Petition [8-1], the court notes certain jurisdictional issues. The
Eighth Circuit has admonished district courts to “be attentive to a satisfaction of
jurisdictional requirements in all cases.” Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 823 F.2d 214,
216 (8th Cir.1987).
This case was removed by Defendant Kaitlyn Krinninger from the Circuit
Court of the City of St. Louis on June 23, 2017 on the basis of diversity
jurisdiction, because the lawsuit is between citizens of different states and the
matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The
Notice of Removal [1] asserts that at the time of the institution of this action,
Plaintiff Hamdija Halilovic was a resident and citizen of the State of Missouri and
Defendant Kaitlyn Krinninger was a resident and citizen of the State of Illinois.

Plaintiff has requested leave of the court to amend his complaint in order to
add Kharel Miller (“Miller”) as a party to the action. According to Plaintiff, the
case could be remanded back to the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis if Miller
was added as a defendant, since his primary residence is in Missouri.

The

proposed Amended Petition states “Plaintiff is a resident of the State of Missouri
and Defendant MILLER is a resident of the State of Missouri,” but does not allege
facts concerning Miller’s citizenship. “A complaint that alleges merely residency,
rather than citizenship, is insufficient to plead diverse citizenship.” 15 Moore's
Federal Practice § 102.31 (3d ed. 2013); see also Sanders, 823 F.2d at 215 & n. 1.
Here, Plaintiff has not fully alleged facts concerning the citizenship of the parties.
I will grant Plaintiff seven (7) days to file a revised amended complaint
which alleges facts that would defeat the existence of diversity of citizenship of the
parties. If Plaintiff fails to timely and fully comply with this order, I will deny
Plaintiff’s Motion to File an Amended Petition.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall submit a revised amended
complaint no later than August 21, 2017.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Rule 16 scheduling conference set
for Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 9:30 a.m. is VACATED. If necessary, I will
reschedule the conference and give the parties an opportunity to submit a revised

joint proposed scheduling plan in a separate order following my decision on
Plaintiff’s Motion to File an Amended Petition.

RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 10th day of August, 2017.