Barli v. PNC Bank, National Association
- P. Castel
- 1:20-cv-11027
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Barli v. PNC Bank, Judge Castel ordered plaintiffs to amend their class-action complaint to fix allegations needed for federal jurisdiction.
The plaintiffs Daniel Barli and Bardan One, L.L.C., and the defendants whose citizenship or organizational information was missing from the complaint were affected by the amendment order.
What happened
In Barli v. PNC Bank, National Association, the plaintiffs relied on the Class Action Fairness Act for federal court jurisdiction. The court found that the complaint did not adequately describe the citizenship and organizational status of several parties.
The court identified missing information about companies’ places of incorporation and principal places of business, Bardan One, L.L.C.’s citizenship, and the citizenship—not merely employment locations—of individual defendants John Prins and Matthew Vilimas. It also said the complaint did not establish whether Daniel Barli was a citizen of New Jersey rather than only a resident.
Judge P. Castel ordered the plaintiffs to amend the complaint and case caption within 30 days to correct these deficiencies. The order addressed the requirements for federal jurisdiction and did not state that the case was dismissed.
The detailed version
- Barli v. PNC Bank, National Association · No. 1:20-cv-11027
- P. Castel
- Jan. 5, 2021
Background
The complaint brought claims by Daniel Barli and Bardan One, L.L.C., on behalf of themselves and proposed classes, against PNC Bank, National Association, and other defendants. It asserted federal subject-matter jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA). CAFA generally gives federal courts jurisdiction over qualifying class actions when the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million and at least one plaintiff is a citizen of a different state from at least one defendant.
Jurisdictional deficiencies
The court explained that a complaint must allege the citizenship of each corporate party, including every state or foreign country where the entity is incorporated and the state or foreign country where it has its principal place of business. For an unincorporated association under CAFA, including an LLC under the approach discussed by the court, citizenship is based on the state where it is organized and the state where it has its principal place of business.
The court found that the complaint did not allege the principal place of business of CoreVest Finance, CoreVest American Finance Lender LLC, or RWT Holdings, Inc. It also found that the complaint did not allege the place of incorporation of PNC Bank, National Association; Midland Loan Services; CoreVest Finance; CoreVest American Finance Lender LLC; RWT Holdings, Inc.; or AlterDormus. The complaint did not identify the organizational form of Midland Loan Services, CoreVest Finance, or AlterDormus. The court directed the plaintiffs to amend the complaint and caption to provide that information.
The complaint also failed to allege the principal place of business and place of incorporation of Bardan One, L.L.C. For individual citizenship, the court stated that a person must be a United States citizen and be domiciled in a state. The complaint identified John Prins and Matthew Vilimas as individual defendants but did not allege their citizenship. It also described Daniel Barli as a resident of New Jersey without alleging whether he was a citizen of New Jersey.
Disposition
Within 30 days, the plaintiffs were ordered to amend the complaint to correct the identified deficiencies. The order did not state that the case was dismissed or decide the parties’ underlying claims. The ruling was a procedural order concerning whether the complaint adequately alleged federal subject-matter jurisdiction.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.