Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 4, 2020

Hudson EFT, LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:20-cv-08603
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureInsurance
In one sentence

In Hudson EFT, LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company, Judge Engelmayer ordered Hudson to identify its members’ citizenship.

Who this affects

Hudson EFT, LLC must provide information about its members’ citizenship so the court can assess diversity of citizenship in the case against Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company.

What happened

Hudson EFT, LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company concerns Hudson’s request to add a non-diverse party and return the case to New York State court.

The court noted that Hudson had not identified the citizenship of its members. For a limited liability company, diversity jurisdiction depends on the citizenship of each member, not merely the company’s principal place of business.

Judge Engelmayer ordered Hudson to file a letter by November 6, 2020, identifying the citizenship of its individual members and the incorporation and principal-business locations of any corporate members. The order did not grant or deny Hudson’s request to join a party or remand the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Hudson EFT, LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company · No. 1:20-cv-08603
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Nov. 4, 2020

Background

The court received submissions concerning Hudson EFT, LLC’s pending request to join a non-diverse party and remand the action to New York State court. The opinion states that Hudson had not alleged or described the citizenship of its members.

Jurisdictional issue

For diversity jurisdiction, a limited liability company has the citizenship of each of its members. Hudson’s original complaint and proposed amended complaint stated only that its principal place of business was in New York. The notice of removal described Hudson, on information and belief, as a domestic corporation organized under New York law, and another submission stated only that Hudson was a citizen of New York. Those statements did not provide the member-citizenship information needed for the court to confirm diversity of citizenship between the parties without the proposed joinder.

Order

The court directed Hudson to file, by Friday, November 6, 2020, a letter identifying: (1) the citizenship of all natural persons who were members of the LLC; and (2) the place of incorporation and principal place of business of any corporate entities that were members of the LLC. The opinion did not state a disposition of Hudson’s request to join the party or remand the action.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.