Albert Margayan v. Nissan North America, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California grants the plaintiff’s motion to remand an action removed under diversity jurisdiction. The court holds that Nissan North America, Inc. failed to plausibly allege that the plaintiff was domiciled in California, noting that residence alone does not establish citizenship and that the removing party bears the jurisdictional burden. The action is remanded to the Los Angeles County Superior Court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. A removing defendant must plausibly allege the plaintiff's actual citizenship, and allegations of residence alone do not suffice to establish domicile or citizenship when they do not adequately show intent to remain.
2. Where the removing defendant has not established the plaintiff's citizenship, any doubt concerning the right of removal requires rejection of federal jurisdiction and remand.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Nissan plausibly alleged complete diversity of citizenship sufficient to support removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
2. Whether allegations that Margayan resided in California, without adequate allegations or evidence of domiciliary intent, established that he was a California citizen for diversity-jurisdiction purposes.
3. Whether the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard discussed in amount-in-controversy removal cases displaced the strict presumption against removal jurisdiction when the removing party failed to establish the plaintiff's citizenship.

Disposition

remanded