Diaz-Otanez v. Brooks
- Jesse Furman
- 1:25-cv-03624
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Diaz-Otanez v. Brooks, Judge Furman ordered defendants to correct their removal filing or the case will return to state court.
The defendants must correct their jurisdictional filing and serve the order; the plaintiff’s counsel must file a notice of appearance. The case may be returned to New York state court if federal subject-matter jurisdiction is not established.
What happened
In Diaz-Otanez v. Brooks, the defendants moved the case from state court to federal court, claiming that the parties were citizens of different states. Their filing listed the parties’ states of residence, but not their states of citizenship.
The court said residence is not enough to establish federal authority over the case. It ordered the defendants to file an amended notice by May 12, 2025, properly stating each party’s citizenship. If they do not establish federal authority by then, the court will return the case to the Supreme Court of New York, Bronx County, without further notice.
Judge Jesse M. Furman also ordered the defendants to serve the plaintiff with the order within two business days and file proof of service. The plaintiff’s counsel must file a notice confirming representation within two business days after receiving the order.
The detailed version
- Diaz-Otanez v. Brooks · No. 1:25-cv-03624
- Jesse Furman
- May 5, 2025
Background
The defendants filed a notice asking to move the action from state court to federal court. They invoked diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, which can allow federal courts to hear certain cases involving citizens of different states. The defendants alleged that there was complete diversity of citizenship, but the notice identified only the parties’ states of residence.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that a person’s residence does not establish citizenship for diversity-jurisdiction purposes. Citizenship depends on domicile, and allegations about residence alone do not show that the federal court has subject-matter jurisdiction—the court’s legal power to hear the case. The order therefore required a corrected filing rather than deciding the underlying dispute.
Order
The defendants must file an amended notice of removal no later than May 12, 2025, properly alleging the citizenship of every party. If they do not file an amended notice establishing subject-matter jurisdiction by that date, the court will remand the action to the Supreme Court of New York, Bronx County, without further notice to any party.
The defendants must serve the plaintiff with a copy of the order within two business days and file proof of service on the docket. Plaintiff’s counsel must file a notice of appearance within two business days after that service.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.