Haymount Urgent Care P.C. and Robert A. Clinton v. Westwood Funding Solutions

Background

The plaintiffs’ complaint asserted federal-question jurisdiction and diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction. The order addresses whether the complaint adequately alleges diversity jurisdiction, not whether the plaintiffs are right on the underlying claims.

Jurisdictional deficiencies

For diversity jurisdiction, all opposing parties must be citizens of different states. The complaint described Westwood Funding Solutions, LLC as organized under New York law with its principal place of business in Brooklyn, New York, but did not identify the citizenship of any members of the limited liability company. The court explained that an LLC’s citizenship depends on the citizenship of its members; if a member is a corporation, the complaint must identify that corporation’s state of incorporation and principal place of business.

The complaint alleged that Dominick Curatola “resides” in New York. The court explained that residence alone does not establish domicile, which is the person’s true fixed home and principal establishment and the place to which the person intends to return. Domicile determines an individual’s citizenship for diversity purposes.

Court’s order

The court allowed the plaintiffs 14 days to serve interrogatories—written questions—to determine Curatola’s citizenship and the citizenship information for Westwood’s members. The defendants must respond within 14 days. The plaintiffs must amend the complaint within 45 days of the order to truthfully and accurately allege the citizenship of each defendant.

Judge P. Castel ordered that if the plaintiffs fail to allege complete diversity by that deadline, the action will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without further notice. The opinion does not state that the court dismissed the action at this stage, and it does not resolve the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims.