Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 22, 2025

Herrera v. Alejandro

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:24-cv-09804
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Herrera v. Alejandro: Judge Broderick ordered defendants to clarify corporate citizenship or remand the case to state court.

Who this affects

The defendants, Fragoso Alejandro and Virginia Transportation Corp., must provide additional information about the corporation's citizenship to establish federal jurisdiction; otherwise, the case may return to state court.

What happened

In Anderson Osmel Abreu Herrera v. Fragoso Alejandro and Virginia Transportation Corp., the defendants moved the case from New York state court to federal court, claiming the parties were citizens of different states.

The court found that the defendants had not adequately identified Virginia Transportation Corp.'s citizenship. For a corporation, that requires stating both its state of incorporation and its principal place of business.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered the defendants to amend their notice of removal by February 5, 2025. He stated that he would remand the case to state court if they did not properly show a basis for federal jurisdiction.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Herrera v. Alejandro · No. 1:24-cv-09804
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
Jan. 22, 2025

Background

On December 19, 2024, the defendants removed the case from the Supreme Court of the State of New York to the Southern District of New York. They relied on diversity jurisdiction, which generally permits a federal court to hear certain disputes involving citizens of different states.

Jurisdictional issue

The court concluded that the defendants had not adequately pleaded the citizenship of Virginia Transportation Corp. The notice of removal stated only that the corporation was incorporated in Rhode Island. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), a corporation's citizenship depends on both its state of incorporation and its principal place of business. The court described the principal place of business as the corporation's "nerve center," where its officers direct, control, and coordinate its activities.

Order

The court directed the defendants to amend their notice of removal by February 5, 2025, to properly plead a basis for federal jurisdiction. The order stated that the court would remand the case to state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) if the defendants did not do so. The opinion does not state that the case was remanded at the time of this order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.