Peralta v. Classic Residence Management Limited Partnership

Background

Classic Residence Management Limited Partnership removed to federal court an action that Tita Peralta had filed in state court. The defendant asserted that federal jurisdiction existed based on diversity of citizenship. Diversity jurisdiction generally requires that the parties be citizens of different states and that more than $75,000 be in dispute.

Citizenship issue

The court explained that a limited partnership’s citizenship depends on the citizenship of all its partners. The defendant provided information about its state of incorporation and principal place of business, but did not provide information about the citizenship of its partners. The court therefore could not determine whether complete diversity existed and ordered the defendant to show, in writing, the citizenship of all its partners.

Amount-in-controversy issue

The defendant argued that the amount in controversy was satisfied partly because Peralta sought lost back pay and future wages. It relied on an assertion that Peralta had been employed until August 2023 and earned an annual salary exceeding $120,000. The court noted, however, that the complaint alleged Peralta was terminated on August 25, 2024, not in August 2023. The court ordered the defendant to explain how the amount-in-controversy requirement was met if Peralta was not seeking a full year of back pay.

Order

The court ordered the defendant to file a written response by May 7, 2025. Peralta could file a reply by May 14, 2025. The opinion does not state that the court granted or denied removal, and it does not reach the merits of Peralta’s underlying claims. The decision is signed only as a United States Magistrate Judge; the judge’s name is not provided in the opinion text.