Schmitz v. Reid Industrial LLC et al
ORDER re 1 Complaint filed by Paul Schmitz, this case will be dismissed on 7/21/17, unless Plaintiff files an amended pleading properly alleging jurisdiction on or before that date. Signed by Judge Sam E Haddon on 7/14/2017. (DED)
IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONT ANA
JUL 14 2017
Clerk, U.S. District Court
Distlict Of Montana
No. CV 17-82-H-SEH
REID INDUSTRIAL LLC d/b/a
FLEMING MANUFACTURING and
DOES AND ROES 1 through I 0,
The Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 1 filed July 14, 2017, contains no
"short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction." Fed. R. Civ.
P. 8(a)(l). The Civil Cover Sheet2 indicates diversity of citizenship is the basis of
this Court's jurisdiction. However, requisite diversity necessary to demonstrate
diversity jurisdiction is not pleaded.
Diversity of citizenship jurisdiction, if it exists, must be grounded in 28
U.S.C. § 1332. That statute provides in pertinent part:
(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of
all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds
the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and
costs, and is between( 1) citizens of different States;
28 U.S.C. § 1332 (a)(l).
It is fundamental that federal jurisdiction cannot be presumed. The diversity
statute requires complete diversity of citizenship between all plaintiffs and all
defendants. 15 JAMES WM. MOORE, ET AL., MOORE'S FEDERAL PRACTICE, §
102.12, at 102-28 (3d ed. 2015). It is to be strictly construed. City of Indianapolis
v. Chase Nat. Bank of City ofNew York, 314 U.S. 63 (1941). Plaintiff, as the party
asserting jurisdiction, has the burden of proving such jurisdiction exists. Lew v.
Moss, 797 F.2d 747, (9th Cir. 1986).
"[T]he citizenship of an LLC for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction is the
citizenship of its members." Cosgrove v. Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir.
1998). Here, Plaintiff failed to allege the identity and citizenship of each of the
individual members of Reid Industrial LLC. Moreover, Plaintiff alleged only the
residence of Schmitz, citizenship is not pleaded. It is thus impossible for the Court
to determine whether complete diversity exists.
In addition, the complaint must allege the amount in controversy. Gaus v.
Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). "[T]he sum claimed by the plaintiff
controls ifthe claim is apparently made in good faith." St. Paul Mercury Jndem.
Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 U.S. 283 (1938). Here, Plaintiffs Complaint and
Demand for Jury Trial 3 fails to assert the requisite amount in controversy.
The court on its own initiative, may raise lack of subject-matter jurisdiction
at any stage, even after the trial and entry of judgment. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.,
546 U.S. 500, 506 (2006).
This case will be dismissed on July 21, 201 7, unless Plaintiff files an
amended pleading prope~alleging jurisdiction on or before that date.
DATED this / J.f day of July, 2017.
United States District Judge
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?