TsidQenu v. Traylor Chateau L.L.C.

Filing 12

OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.An Order of Dismissal will accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 1/22/18. (CLA)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ELIJAH DAVID TSIDQENU, Plaintiff, v. TRAYLOR CHATEAU L.L.C., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 4:17CV2599 HEA OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on review of the file after plaintiff’s filing of a response to the Court’s Show Cause Order dated October 19, 2017. For the following reasons, the Court will dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On October 19, 2017, the Court issued a Show Cause Order directing plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See ECF No. 4. The Court noted that plaintiff’s case was brought under a Missouri statute, and stated no basis for relief under federal law. Additionally, the parties were not diverse, and plaintiff’s damages in the complaint were calculated to be $50,000, which is less than the jurisdictional amount. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). In response, plaintiff filed a memorandum stating: “I’d like to enter a motion that to seek damages in the amount of $100,000 as it is befitting for the subject matter jurisdiction exceeding $75,000 under U.S.C. § 1332.” See ECF No. 10. Regardless of the amount in controversy, however, to exercise diversity jurisdiction, plaintiff and defendant would have to be citizens of different states. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Here, the Court noted in its Show Cause Order that plaintiff and defendant appeared to both be citizens of Missouri. Plaintiff has not disputed this assertion. In fact, the Civil Cover Sheet filled out by plaintiff indicates both plaintiff and defendant reside in St. Louis County. The Court finds that it does not have original jurisdiction over this civil action, as the action does not arise under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States, and the parties are citizens of the same state. As a result, the Court will dismiss plaintiff’s claim for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. An Order of Dismissal will accompany this Memorandum and Order. Dated this 22nd day of January, 2018 ___________________________________ HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?