Emerson Hall Associates, L.P. v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America

Filing 22

ORDER Regarding Jurisdiction. Proof of Diversity Citizenship due 12/4/2015. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 11/20/2015. (voc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

EMERSON HALL ASSOCIATES, L.P.,
ORDER
Plaintiff,
v.

15-cv-447-jdp

TRAVELERS CASUALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

Defendant Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America removed this insurance
dispute from the Wisconsin Circuit Court for Rock County. Plaintiff Emerson Hall
Associates, L.P.’s state court complaint alleged that it is an Illinois limited partnership and
that Travelers is a Connecticut corporation with its principal place of business in
Connecticut. Dkt. 2-3, at 3. Based on these allegations, Travelers’s notice of removal alleged
that this court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, because the parties are
completely diverse.
“[F]ederal courts have an independent obligation to ensure that they do not exceed
the scope of their jurisdiction, and therefore they must raise and decide jurisdictional
questions that the parties either overlook or elect not to press.” Henderson ex rel. Henderson v.
Shinseki, 562 U.S. 428, 434 (2011). The party invoking federal jurisdiction—here Travelers—
bears the burden of establishing that jurisdiction is present. Smart v. Local 702 Int’l Bhd. of
Elec. Workers, 562 F.3d 798, 803 (7th Cir. 2009). In this case, the allegations in the
complaint are insufficient to determine Emerson’s citizenship. Thus, the court will direct
Travelers to file an amended notice of removal that adequately alleges a basis for exercising
subject matter jurisdiction over this case.

Emerson is a limited partnership, and “general and limited partnerships are citizens of
every jurisdiction of which any partner is a citizen.” Ind. Gas Co. v. Home Ins. Co., 141 F.3d
314, 316 (7th Cir. 1998). Neither Emerson’s state court complaint, nor Travelers’s notice of
removal allege the citizenships of Emerson’s partners. Thus, it is impossible to determine the
partnership’s citizenship. Information about the state in which Emerson was organized and
where the partnership has its principal place of business, see Dkt. 2-3, at 3, is not sufficient to
establish citizenship.
Before remanding this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the court will afford
Travelers a brief opportunity to file an amended notice of removal that alleges the name and
citizenship of each of Emerson’s partners. If any of Emerson’s partners are themselves limited
liability companies, partnerships, or other similar entities, then Travelers must allege the
citizenship of those partners as well. See Meryerson v. Harrah’s E. Chi. Casino, 299 F.3d 616,
617 (7th Cir. 2002) (per curiam) (“[T]he citizenship of unincorporated associations must be
traced through however many layers of partners or members there may be.”). If Travelers
determines that complete diversity does not exist, then the parties should file a joint
stipulation to remand this case to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Defendant Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America may have until
December 4, 2015, to file an amended notice of removal containing good faith
allegations sufficient to establish complete diversity of citizenship for purposes of
determining whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332.

2

2. If defendant fails to timely amend its notice of removal, then the court will
remand this case to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Entered November 20, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge

3