3 Brothers Plumbing & Heating LLC v. Desilva
- Naomi Buchwald
- 1:23-cv-05483
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In 3 Brothers Plumbing v. Desilva, Judge Buchwald dismissed the case because the pleadings did not establish diversity jurisdiction and denied amendment.
3 Brothers Plumbing & Heating, LLC’s case was dismissed because the court found that diversity jurisdiction had not been established. The plaintiff’s request to file a second amended complaint was denied, and the defendants’ pending motion and the plaintiff’s cross-motion were terminated.
What happened
3 Brothers Plumbing & Heating, LLC sued Joseph Desilva, Doreen Desilva, All About Maintenance, and SmashBurger Master, LLC, seeking payment for plumbing, heating, and cooling services. The plaintiff relied on diversity jurisdiction, which requires the parties to be citizens of different states and the dispute to exceed $75,000.
The court repeatedly told the plaintiff to provide citizenship information for itself and SmashBurger Master, LLC. The plaintiff identified its sole member but did not state that member’s domicile, and it provided no information about SmashBurger Master, LLC’s members. The court also found that the plaintiff had made contradictory statements about its location and citizenship.
Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald ruled that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction and dismissed the case. She denied the plaintiff’s request to file a second amended complaint because it did not fix the jurisdictional problems, and the court directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motions and close the case.
The detailed version
- 3 Brothers Plumbing & Heating LLC v. Desilva · No. 1:23-cv-05483
- Naomi Buchwald
- Aug. 14, 2024
Background
3 Brothers Plumbing & Heating, LLC sued Joseph Desilva, Doreen Desilva, All About Maintenance, and SmashBurger Master, LLC to recover money allegedly owed for services. The plaintiff invoked diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). That form of federal jurisdiction requires complete diversity—every plaintiff must be a citizen of a different state from every defendant—and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000.
For a limited liability company, citizenship depends on the citizenship of each member. The court explained that the plaintiff had not adequately alleged its own citizenship or the citizenship of SmashBurger Master, LLC. The plaintiff’s complaints described it as a foreign entity registered to do business in New York and alleged a New York principal place of business, but the court found that the plaintiff had made shifting allegations about its domicile and principal place of business. The plaintiff also did not state the domicile of the person it identified as its sole member.
The defendants submitted information identifying All About Maintenance as a Florida corporation and stating that SmashBurger Master, LLC had 26 investors, but the submissions did not establish the citizenship of SmashBurger Master, LLC’s members. The court noted that possible New Jersey citizenship for both the plaintiff and SmashBurger Master, LLC could defeat diversity. The opinion also states that the plaintiff had been given multiple opportunities and specific guidance concerning these jurisdictional deficiencies.
Ruling
The plaintiff cross-moved to file a second amended complaint. Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald denied that request because the proposed pleading did not resolve the jurisdictional defects. The court concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction and that the case “must be dismissed.” It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motions pending at ECF Nos. 23 and 28 and close the case. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.