Summary
The United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama orders Ameris Bank to show cause why its diversity action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court explains that the complaint does not adequately allege the citizenship of the defendant limited liability companies because it fails to identify their members and each member’s citizenship.
Holdings
- A plaintiff invoking diversity jurisdiction must identify each member of a limited liability company and allege the citizenship of each member; if a member is itself a limited liability entity, the plaintiff must trace and allege the citizenship of that entity's members through each layer of ownership or membership.
- A federal court must sua sponte evaluate its subject matter jurisdiction at the earliest possible stage and throughout the action, and must dismiss the action if jurisdiction is lacking.
Questions Presented
- Whether the complaint adequately alleged the existence of complete diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
- Whether allegations concerning an LLC's organization, principal place of business, or owners sufficiently establish the LLC's citizenship.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (7)
- Taylor v. Appleton, 30 F.3d 1365, 1367 (11th Cir. 1994)(followed)
- Bender v. Williamsport Area School District, 475 U.S. 534, 541 (1986)(followed)
- University of South Alabama v. American Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 410 (11th Cir. 1999)(followed)
- Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 506, 19 L. Ed. 264 (1868)(followed)
- Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings L.L.C., 374 F.3d 1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004)(followed)
- Palmer v. Hospital Authority of Randolph County, 22 F.3d 1559, 1564 (11th Cir. 1994)(followed)
- Post v. Biomet, Inc., No. 3:20-CV-527-J-34JRK, 2020 WL 2766210, at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 28, 2020)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…