Dallemagne v. Khan
- John Koeltl
- 1:19-cv-07934
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Dallemagne v. Khan, Judge Wang required plaintiffs to provide citizenship declarations to establish diversity jurisdiction before a damages inquest.
The plaintiffs, who were ordered to provide citizenship declarations by November 11, 2020; the court’s ability to proceed with the damages inquest depended on establishing subject-matter jurisdiction.
What happened
Dallemagne v. Khan concerns the court’s review of whether it has federal jurisdiction before determining damages. The plaintiffs claimed jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship.
The court noted that the plaintiffs’ declarations did not identify their citizenships. It also explained that diversity jurisdiction generally cannot be based on a lawsuit involving United States citizens domiciled abroad.
Judge Ona T. Wang ordered each plaintiff to submit a declaration stating their citizenship or citizenships by November 11, 2020, sufficient to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction. The order did not decide the amount of damages.
The detailed version
- Dallemagne v. Khan · No. 1:19-cv-07934
- John Koeltl
- Nov. 4, 2020
Background
The action came before the court for an inquest on damages. The plaintiffs claimed federal subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(2), as stated in the order.
Jurisdictional issue
The court explained that subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived by the parties. It also stated that a lawsuit by or against United States citizens domiciled abroad cannot be based on diversity jurisdiction. The plaintiffs’ declarations did not provide information about their citizenships.
Order
The court ordered the plaintiffs to submit declarations by November 11, 2020, stating the citizenship or citizenships of each plaintiff in a manner sufficient to establish subject-matter jurisdiction. The order addressed the jurisdictional record and did not determine damages or the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.