Buxbaum v. Webull Financial LLC
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:24-cv-09784
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Buxbaum v. Webull, Judge Broderick dismissed the operative complaint for failing to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction.
Michael Buxbaum, who was proceeding without a lawyer, must file an amended complaint properly asserting subject-matter jurisdiction within 30 days to continue the action. Webull Financial LLC remains the defendant, and the later complaints were struck.
What happened
In Buxbaum v. Webull Financial LLC, Michael Buxbaum filed several versions of his complaint without getting permission to file repeated amendments. The court treated the first amended complaint as the operative pleading.
The court found that Buxbaum did not identify a specific federal law supporting federal-question jurisdiction. It also found that he did not properly allege diversity jurisdiction because he did not identify the citizenship of Webull Financial LLC’s members or allege more than $75,000 in dispute.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice and with leave to replead. He struck the later complaints, dismissed Buxbaum’s motion as moot, and gave Buxbaum 30 days to file an amended complaint properly stating subject-matter jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- Buxbaum v. Webull Financial LLC · No. 1:24-cv-09784
- Vernon Broderick
- Jan. 22, 2025
Background
Michael Buxbaum, proceeding without a lawyer, filed this action against Webull Financial LLC on December 17, 2024. He filed an amended complaint the next day, followed by a second amended complaint and a filing styled as a supplemental complaint. The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1) allows one amendment without court permission or the opposing party’s written consent. Because Buxbaum filed three later versions without permission or consent, the court treated the December 18 amended complaint as the operative pleading.
Jurisdiction
The amended complaint asserted federal-question jurisdiction and diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction. For federal-question jurisdiction, Buxbaum identified only “US Code Title 12,” which contains many chapters and sections. The court held that he needed to identify the specific statute that gave him a legal claim and found that he had not alleged facts supporting such a claim.
For diversity jurisdiction, Buxbaum alleged that he was a citizen of Florida and that Webull Financial LLC was incorporated in New York. The court explained that an LLC’s citizenship depends on the citizenship of each of its members, not merely its state of incorporation. Because the amended complaint did not allege the citizenship of Webull’s members or that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, the court found that it did not properly plead diversity jurisdiction.
Rulings
Because the amended complaint failed to plead subject-matter jurisdiction, the court dismissed it without prejudice and with leave to replead. The court struck the second amended complaint and supplemental complaint for failing to comply with Rule 15(a)(2). It also dismissed as moot Buxbaum’s motion seeking an order granting the relief requested in the first amended complaint. The court gave Buxbaum 30 days to file an amended complaint properly asserting subject-matter jurisdiction; if he did not do so, the clerk was directed to terminate the action. Judge Vernon S. Broderick signed the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.