National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh v. PennantPark Floating…
National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA. v. PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd et al.
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:26-cv-05904
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA. v. PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd., Judge Broderick dismissed the complaint without prejudice because diversity jurisdiction was not adequately pleaded.
The plaintiff’s case was dismissed without prejudice because the complaint did not adequately establish diversity jurisdiction. The plaintiff was given until July 25, 2026, to file a second amended filing addressing the jurisdictional defects.
What happened
National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA. sued PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. and other defendants, alleging federal jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and the amount involved. The court reviewed the complaint’s jurisdictional allegations.
The court found that the complaint did not show complete diversity. It did not state PennantPark’s principal place of business, and it did not identify the members or citizenship of several limited liability company defendants. Without that information, the plaintiff had not established that the federal court had authority to hear the case.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick dismissed the complaint without prejudice on July 15, 2026, and ordered the plaintiff to file a second amended filing by July 25, 2026, to cure the identified defects.
The detailed version
- National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh v. PennantPark Floating… · No. 1:26-cv-05904
- Vernon Broderick
- July 15, 2026
Background
National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA. filed a complaint against PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. and other defendants. The plaintiff alleged that the court had original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1335(a) and § 2361 because the funds involved exceeded $500 and there were two or more opposing claimants with diverse citizenship. The court analyzed the allegations under the rules governing diversity jurisdiction.
Jurisdictional Defects
A party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing that jurisdiction exists. For diversity jurisdiction, every plaintiff must be a citizen of a different state from every defendant. The plaintiff alleged that it was incorporated under Pennsylvania law and had its principal place of business in New York, making it a citizen of Pennsylvania and New York. The plaintiff described PennantPark as registered in Maryland and listed offices in Maryland and New York, but did not state PennantPark’s principal place of business. The court therefore could not determine whether complete diversity existed between the plaintiff and PennantPark.
The court also explained that a limited liability company’s citizenship depends on the citizenship of each of its members, not merely its place of organization or business. The complaint did not list the members or the members’ citizenship for NPS Holding Group, Aeonion Alliance Investments, LLC, or NPS Debt Acquisition, LLC. The court held that the plaintiff had not established diversity jurisdiction as to those defendants.
Disposition
The court relied on 28 U.S.C. § 1653, which permits defective jurisdictional allegations to be amended. Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered that the plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed without prejudice and directed the plaintiff to file a second amended filing by July 25, 2026, to cure the identified defects. The opinion does not decide the underlying dispute between the parties.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court dismissed the complaint for inadequately pleaded subject-matter jurisdiction without reaching the merits.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.