Liberty Harbor Coffee Inc. v. Moss

Background

Liberty Harbor Coffee, Inc., also known as Brewshot, and NYNJ Coffee2 LLC, also known as Jersey Social, brought a breach-of-contract action in New York state court against Maggie Moss and Moss Business Consulting LLC. The claims concerned alleged failures to provide marketing, management, and branding services to Brewshot and alleged interference by Moss with Jersey Social’s employment contracts.

The defendants removed the case to federal court, asserting diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Diversity jurisdiction permits a federal court to hear a civil case when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the opposing parties are citizens of different states. The plaintiffs moved to remand, arguing that complete diversity was absent.

Jurisdictional dispute

The parties agreed that Brewshot was a citizen of New Jersey. They disputed Jersey Social’s citizenship and Moss’s citizenship. For diversity purposes, an LLC has the citizenship of each of its members. Jersey Social’s members were Arun Nanda and American Management Strategies, Inc. Based on the filings submitted by the parties, the court treated American Management Strategies, Inc. as a corporation that was a citizen of New York, where it was incorporated, and New Jersey, where it had its principal place of business.

Because Moss was the sole member of Moss Business Consulting LLC, that LLC’s citizenship depended on Moss’s citizenship. The plaintiffs argued that Moss remained domiciled in New York while temporarily living in Colorado to pursue a PhD. Moss stated that she had lived in Colorado since approximately August 2024, worked there, attended Colorado State University, registered to vote there, obtained a Colorado driver’s license, intended to remain there permanently, and planned to purchase a home there. She also stated that she had visited New York only twice in the preceding eight months, for recreation.

Court’s analysis

An individual’s domicile is the person’s fixed home and principal establishment, together with an intent to return there when absent. A person changing domicile generally must establish both residence in the new state and an intent to remain there. The court explained that out-of-state college and graduate students are ordinarily presumed to be temporary residents of the state where they study, so stronger evidence is needed to show a change of domicile.

The court concluded that Moss’s evidence overcame that presumption. Her Colorado employment, residence, voter registration, driver’s license, stated intent to remain permanently, and plans to buy a home supported Colorado domicile. The court also noted that there was no countervailing evidence showing that Moss was domiciled in New York or another state. It therefore found complete diversity and did not reach the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims or the defendants’ argument that the tortious-interference claim should be dismissed.

Disposition

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon denied the plaintiffs’ motion to remand. The court did not rule on the defendants’ separate motion to dismiss; instead, it directed the plaintiffs to respond within fourteen days and allowed the defendants seven days to reply, if they chose to do so. The court also stated that, having found complete diversity, it did not need to consider the defendants’ separate request to dismiss Jersey Social as a nondiverse party.