Elevate Music Fund 3 LP v. Joe Carlos Scaife Estate
- James Oetken
- 1:25-cv-00540
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Elevate Music Fund 3 LP v. Joe Carlos Scaife Estate, Judge Oetken dismissed the case without prejudice because diversity jurisdiction was not adequately pleaded.
Elevate Music Fund 3 LP, Joe Carlos Scaife Estate, and Danielle Godwin Scaife; the case was closed without prejudice because the complaint did not adequately plead subject-matter jurisdiction.
What happened
In Elevate Music Fund 3 LP v. Joe Carlos Scaife Estate, the court said the complaint did not identify the citizenship of every partner in Elevate Music Fund 3 LP, a limited partnership. That information was needed to determine whether the court had jurisdiction based on the parties’ citizenship.
The court had ordered Elevate Music Fund 3 LP to explain by February 4, 2025, why the case should not be dismissed. Elevate did not respond and did not move to file an amended complaint that properly stated the jurisdictional facts.
Judge J. Paul Oetken dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. A dismissal without prejudice does not bar refiling.
The detailed version
- Elevate Music Fund 3 LP v. Joe Carlos Scaife Estate · No. 1:25-cv-00540
- James Oetken
- Feb. 7, 2025
Background
Elevate Music Fund 3 LP sued Joe Carlos Scaife Estate and Danielle Godwin Scaife. The court questioned whether it had subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship. For a limited partnership, the relevant citizenship includes the citizenship of each general and limited partner.
Court’s Analysis
The court had previously ordered Elevate to show cause—explain why the case should not be dismissed—by February 4, 2025. The court had warned that the action could be dismissed if Elevate did not respond. The complaint did not allege the citizenship of each partner in Elevate, and Elevate did not respond to the order or move to file an amended complaint that properly pleaded jurisdiction.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The opinion does not decide the underlying dispute between the parties.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.