Kemper Independence Insurance Company v. Haughey
- Jesse Furman
- 1:20-cv-05945
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Kemper v. Porto, Judge Furman ordered Kemper to justify diversity jurisdiction or face dismissal without prejudice.
Kemper must address the court's concern about diversity jurisdiction and file the required letter-brief. Anthony Porto Jr. and William Haughey may respond as described in the order. The case could be dismissed without prejudice if Kemper does not comply or does not persuade the court.
What happened
Kemper Independence Insurance Company sued Anthony Porto Jr. and William Haughey in federal court. Kemper relied on diversity jurisdiction, which generally requires the parties to be citizens of different states, but its complaint acknowledged that the parties were not completely diverse. Kemper argued that Haughey was only a nominal defendant whose citizenship should be ignored.
The court said it must independently determine whether it has subject-matter jurisdiction. It ordered Kemper to explain, with legal authority, why Haughey should be treated as a nominal defendant and why his presence would not defeat diversity jurisdiction.
Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered Kemper to file a letter-brief by August 10, 2020. If Kemper did not file the letter or failed to persuade the court, the court stated that the case would be dismissed without prejudice; defendants could respond within one week of filing an answer.
The detailed version
- Kemper Independence Insurance Company v. Haughey · No. 1:20-cv-05945
- Jesse Furman
- Aug. 3, 2020
Background
Kemper Independence Insurance Company brought the action against Anthony Porto Jr. and William Haughey, whom the complaint described as a nominal defendant. Kemper invoked federal diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Jurisdictional issue
The complaint acknowledged that the parties were not completely diverse. It nevertheless suggested that Haughey's citizenship should not count because he was only a nominal defendant. The court noted that it has an independent obligation to examine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists.
Order
The court ordered Kemper to file a letter-brief by August 10, 2020, citing appropriate authority and showing both that Haughey was properly treated as a nominal defendant and that his presence did not destroy diversity jurisdiction. The court stated that, if Kemper failed to file the letter or failed to persuade the court, the case would be dismissed without prejudice without further notice. The order also stated that defendants could respond to Kemper's letter within one week of filing an answer. Judge Jesse M. Furman did not dismiss the case in this order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.