DeFazio v. Boyden World Corporation
- Jon Tigar
- 4:19-cv-06121
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In DeFazio v. Boyden World Corporation, Judge Tigar ordered DeFazio to explain within 21 days why the case should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Jeff DeFazio must address the court’s jurisdictional concerns within 21 days. The defendants may respond within seven days thereafter, and the case could be dismissed if jurisdiction is not established.
What happened
In DeFazio v. Boyden World Corporation, Jeff DeFazio brought state-law claims against Boyden World Corporation and others. His complaint did not include the required explanation of why the federal court had jurisdiction.
DeFazio’s amended civil cover sheet relied on diversity jurisdiction, but the complaint did not properly allege the parties’ citizenship. The court explained that residence alone does not establish an individual’s citizenship, an LLC’s citizenship depends on its members, and a corporation’s citizenship depends on its incorporation state and principal place of business.
Judge Tigar ordered DeFazio to explain within 21 days why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Defendants may file a response within seven days after DeFazio’s filing; the court did not dismiss the case in this order.
The detailed version
- DeFazio v. Boyden World Corporation · No. 4:19-cv-06121
- Jon Tigar
- Dec. 23, 2019
Background
Jeff DeFazio sued Boyden World Corporation and other defendants, asserting only state-law claims. The complaint did not include the jurisdictional statement required by the court’s local rules. An amended civil cover sheet asserted federal jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and indicated that DeFazio was a California citizen and that the defendants were citizens of another state.
Jurisdictional problem
The court explained that the complaint did not adequately allege the parties’ citizenship. For DeFazio and Defendant Dick McCallister, the complaint alleged residence, but an individual’s citizenship depends on domicile: the person’s permanent home, where the person resides with the intention to remain or intends to return.
The complaint described Defendant RAM SF LLC as licensed to do business in California and located in San Francisco, but did not identify or allege the citizenship of its members. The court stated that an LLC’s citizenship must be determined by considering the citizenship of its members. The complaint alleged that Boyden World Corporation did business in San Francisco and was headquartered in New York, but did not allege where the corporation was incorporated or adequately establish its principal place of business. A corporation is a citizen of both its incorporation state and the state of its principal place of business.
Order
Federal courts have limited jurisdiction. The court stated that jurisdiction could exist if the case asserted a federal claim or if the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 and the parties were citizens of different states. Because the parties’ citizenship was unknown, the court could not determine whether it had subject-matter jurisdiction.
The court ordered DeFazio to show cause—that is, explain—within 21 days why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Defendants could file a response within seven days after DeFazio’s filing. The order did not itself dismiss the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.