Diassinos v. Oliveira Contracting, Inc.
- Alison Nathan
- 1:19-cv-07841-SN
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Diassinos v. Oliveira Contracting, Judge Nathan ordered a jurisdictional amendment before deciding whether the case could continue.
Stacey Diassinos must amend the complaint to provide Oliveira Contracting, Inc.’s citizenship information. Oliveira Contracting, Inc. and Thomas H. Martins are affected because the case’s continuation depends on whether complete diversity of citizenship can be truthfully alleged.
What happened
In Diassinos v. Oliveira Contracting, Stacey Diassinos sued Oliveira Contracting, Inc. and Thomas H. Martins, relying on the court’s authority over disputes involving citizens of different states. The complaint identified Diassinos as a Florida citizen and Martins as a New York citizen.
The court said the complaint did not provide all the required information about Oliveira Contracting, Inc.’s citizenship. For a corporation, the complaint must state both its state of incorporation and its principal place of business.
Judge Alison J. Nathan ordered Diassinos to amend the complaint within ten days to provide that information. The court warned that if she could not truthfully allege complete diversity of citizenship by then, the complaint would be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without further notice.
The detailed version
- Diassinos v. Oliveira Contracting, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-07841-SN
- Alison Nathan
- Jan. 6, 2020
Background
Stacey Diassinos brought the action against Oliveira Contracting, Inc., and Thomas H. Martins. The complaint invoked diversity of citizenship as the basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction, meaning jurisdiction based on the parties being citizens of different states.
The complaint alleged that Diassinos is a citizen of Florida and that Martins is a citizen of New York. It alleged that Oliveira Contracting, Inc. is authorized to do business in New York and has its principal place of business there, but it did not allege the corporation’s state of incorporation.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that federal courts have an independent duty to determine whether subject matter jurisdiction exists. For diversity jurisdiction, a complaint must allege both the state where a corporation is incorporated and the state where it has its principal place of business. A corporation is considered a citizen of both states for jurisdictional purposes.
Order and effect
Judge Alison J. Nathan ordered Diassinos to amend the complaint within ten days of the order to allege Oliveira Contracting, Inc.’s citizenship, including its state of incorporation and principal place of business. The court did not dismiss the complaint in this order. Instead, it stated that the complaint will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without further notice if Diassinos cannot truthfully allege complete diversity by the deadline.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.