Elhania v. Airbnb, Inc.

Background

Abdallah Elhania and Zahra Elmenjaoui filed a California state-court action asserting negligence, wrongful death, premises liability, unfair business practices under California Business and Professions Code section 17200, and nuisance. The claims arose from their teenage son’s death at a party held at an Airbnb rental in 2021. They sought damages and injunctive relief.

Airbnb, Inc. and Airbnb Payments, Inc. removed the case to federal court under the diversity-jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). They asserted that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 and that the parties were citizens of different states. The plaintiffs moved to remand, arguing that complete diversity was absent because they were domiciled in California. In the alternative, they asked the court to dismiss the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) so they could refile in state court.

Analysis

For diversity jurisdiction, every plaintiff must be a citizen of a different state from every defendant. A natural person’s state citizenship is based on domicile: the person’s permanent home, where the person lives with an intention to remain or to which the person intends to return. The party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing the required jurisdictional facts.

The plaintiffs lived in California until November 2022, then went to Texas. They were residing in Texas when the complaint was filed on March 23, 2023, but returned to California on April 1, 2023. The plaintiffs stated that the Texas stay was a healing trip after their son’s death and that they always intended to return to California.

The court found the plaintiffs’ declarations and supporting documents sufficient to establish California domicile when the action was filed. The court relied on their residence in California since 2008, California driver’s licenses and voter registrations, Plaintiff Elmenjaoui’s continued remote work for a California school, their daughters’ continued remote attendance at California schools, and the fact that the plaintiffs did not file Texas tax returns. The court also declined the defendants’ request for limited jurisdictional discovery, finding that the existing record was sufficient to resolve domicile.

Disposition

The court concluded that diversity jurisdiction did not exist and that the case had to be returned to state court. Judge Jeffrey White granted the plaintiffs’ motion to remand. The case was remanded to San Francisco County Superior Court. The plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss was denied as moot, the scheduled hearings were vacated, and the clerk was directed to close the federal file.