Weingarten v. CBS
- John Cronan
- 1:20-cv-02598
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Weingarten v. CBS, Judge Swain ordered Lauren Weingarten to clarify citizenship facts supporting diversity jurisdiction or explain why the case should not be dismissed.
Lauren Weingarten, CBS, and Matt DeRoss; the order required Weingarten to provide additional facts concerning the parties’ citizenship or explain why the action should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
What happened
In Weingarten v. CBS, the court reviewed the complaint and found that it did not provide enough information to establish diversity jurisdiction. The complaint did not state CBS’s corporate form and state of incorporation, Weingarten’s state citizenship, or Matt DeRoss’s state citizenship.
The court explained that residence alone does not establish citizenship for diversity-jurisdiction purposes. It ordered Weingarten to file and serve a supplement by April 17, 2020, containing sufficient jurisdictional allegations or to explain in writing why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain issued the order on April 3, 2020. The order did not dismiss the case; it required additional jurisdictional information or an explanation showing why dismissal would be unwarranted.
The detailed version
- Weingarten v. CBS · No. 1:20-cv-02598
- John Cronan
- Apr. 3, 2020
Background
Lauren Weingarten sued CBS and Matt DeRoss. The complaint asserted federal jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Jurisdictional Deficiencies
The court reviewed the complaint to determine whether it established subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court’s legal authority to hear the case. It found that the complaint omitted allegations about CBS’s corporate form and state of incorporation, if applicable; Weingarten’s state citizenship; and DeRoss’s state citizenship.
The court stated that the parties’ residences would not be enough to establish citizenship for diversity-jurisdiction purposes. It also explained that the citizenship of a business entity other than a corporation is determined by the citizenship of its members, while a corporation is a citizen of its state of incorporation and the state where it has its principal place of business.
Order
The court cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3), which requires dismissal if the court determines that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. It ordered Weingarten, by April 17, 2020, to file and serve a supplement to the complaint containing allegations sufficient to establish a basis for subject-matter jurisdiction or otherwise show cause in writing why the case should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The order did not itself dismiss the action.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.