Nemelka v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. et al

Filing 7

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Case Closed. Signed by Judge Paul G. Cassell on 07/18/2007. (asp)

Nemelka v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. et al

Doc. 7

Case 2:07-cv-00524-PGC

Document 7

Filed 07/18/2007

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER M. NEMELKA, Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

vs.

THE CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS, a Utah Non-Profit Corporation, JEFFREY R. HOLLAND, an individual, RUSSELL M. BALLARD, an individual, DENNIS P. SMITH, an individual, HYRUM W. SMITH, an individual, and JOHN AND JANE DOES, 1-10, Defendants.

Case No. 2:07-CV-524

Before the court is Christopher M. Nemelka's complaint against The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and other defendants. Nemelka asserts that jurisdiction is proper "because of diversity of citizenship in that some of the Defendants do not reside in the State of Utah."1 Unfortunately for Mr. Nemelka, the fact that some of the defendants may be citizens of different states than him does not make jurisdiction

1

Compl. 2 (Docket No. 1).

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:07-cv-00524-PGC

Document 7

Filed 07/18/2007

Page 2 of 2

proper in this court. The basic requirement for diversity jurisdiction is that the plaintiff be of different citizenship than all of the defendants.2 In his complaint, Nemelka states that he is a resident of Utah County, Utah.3 He also states that The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has its headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah.4 Moreover, Nemelka notes that at least one of the four defendant individuals resides in the state of Utah.5 Because the plaintiff and at least one of the defendants are citizens of the state of Utah, diversity citizenship is lacking. Consequently, the court must DISMISS this case. The Clerk's Office is directed to close this case. DATED this 18th day of July, 2007. BY THE COURT:

_______________________ Paul G. Cassell United States District Judge

Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267 (1806); Harris v. Illinois-California Exp., Inc., 687 F.2d 1361, 1366 (10th Cir. 1982).
3

2

Compl. 3. Id. Id. at 3-4.

4

5