Connolly v. Foreman
- P. Castel
- 1:19-cv-07469
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Connolly v. Foreman, Judge Castel dismissed the diversity case because citizens of Ireland and Canada were on opposite sides.
Yvonne Connolly and Kevin J Foreman were affected because the court dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and ordered the case closed.
What happened
Connolly v. Foreman involved Yvonne Connolly, a citizen of Ireland, and Kevin J Foreman, whom the opinion identifies as a citizen of Canada. Connolly invoked federal jurisdiction based on the parties' citizenship.
The court ruled that federal diversity jurisdiction was unavailable when citizens of two foreign countries were on opposite sides of the case. It dismissed the action and directed the Clerk to close the case.
Judge P. Castel issued the order on January 17, 2020.
The detailed version
- Connolly v. Foreman · No. 1:19-cv-07469
- P. Castel
- Jan. 17, 2020
Background Yvonne Connolly brought the action under the federal diversity-of-citizenship statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The opinion states that Connolly is a citizen of the Republic of Ireland and that Kevin J Foreman is a citizen of Canada.
Jurisdictional issue The court considered whether diversity jurisdiction existed when the plaintiff and defendant were citizens of different foreign countries. It explained that the rule requiring complete diversity applies to cases involving foreign citizens and that having aliens on both sides of a case destroys diversity jurisdiction.
Ruling The court held that it had no subject-matter jurisdiction because there were aliens on both sides of the case. The action was dismissed, and the Clerk was directed to close the case. Judge P. Castel signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.