Beaird, David et al v. U.S. Xpress Leasing, Inc. et al

Filing 20

ORDER Requiring Proof of Citizenship. Proof of Citizenship due 10/5/2011. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 9/30/201. (voc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DAVID N. BEAIRD and
SARA BEAIRD,
ORDER
Plaintiffs,
11-cv-252-bbc
v.
U.S. XPRESS, INC. and
NANCY A. HILL,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This case is before the court on defendants’ motion for a change of venue. The
motion is fully briefed, but one technicality prevents resolution of the motion: the parties
have not shown that this court has jurisdiction over the case. Plaintiffs rely on 28 U.S.C. §
1332 as a basis for jurisdiction, which requires a showing that the parties are citizens of
different states.
In their complaint, plaintiffs allege that they are “residents” of Illinois and that
defendant Nancy A. Hill is a resident of Michigan. Dkt. #1, ¶¶ 1-8. However, the Court
of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has stated repeatedly that allegations regarding
“residency” are not enough. Craig v. Ontario Corp., 543 F.3d 872, 876 (7th Cir. 2008)
(“They claim to be ‘residents' of Arizona—an inadequate jurisdictional claim to begin with,

as we repeatedly have reminded litigants and district judges.”); Meyerson v. Harrah's East
Chicago Casino, 299 F .3d 616, 617 (7th Cir. 2002) (“[R]esidence and citizenship are not
synonyms and it is the latter that matters for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.”); McMahon
v. Bunn-O-Matic Corp., 150 F.3d 651, 653 (7th Cir. 1998) (“An allegation of residence is
inadequate.”). The proponent of jurisdiction must show where each individual is domiciled,
that is, where he or she intends to live for the foreseeable future. Dakuras v. Edwards, 312
F.3d 256, 258 (7th Cir. 2002). Residency and domicile may be the same for most
individuals, but this court is obligated by circuit precedent to obtain more specific
information. Plaintiffs properly alleged defendant U.S. Xpress’s state of incorporation
(Nevada) and its principal place of business (Tennessee), so plaintiffs need not supply any
further information regarding this defendant’s citizenship at this time.
However, plaintiffs will have to provide more information to the court or face
dismissal of their suit. I will give them one week in which to advise the court of their
citizenship and that of defendant Nancy A. Hill.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiffs David N. Beaird and Sara Beaird may have until
October 5, 2011, in which to provide the court evidence of their citizenship and the

citizenship of defendant Nancy A. Hill.
Entered this 30th day of September, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
BARBARA B. CRABB
District Judge