Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 8, 2022

Davila v. Intren LLC

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:22-cv-01558
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Davila v. Intren LLC, Judge Woods remanded the case because defendants failed to establish diversity jurisdiction or the required amount in controversy.

Who this affects

Marisol Davila, Intren LLC, and Brett William Sparengerk were affected. The federal court sent the case back to New York state court and closed the federal case.

What happened

Davila v. Intren LLC began in New York state court and was moved to federal court by the defendants, who relied on diversity jurisdiction. They had to show that the opposing parties were citizens of different states and that more than $75,000 was at stake.

The court found that the defendants did not provide the citizenship of Intren LLC’s members. An LLC’s citizenship depends on the citizenship of all its members, not merely the state where it is described as a resident. Although the defendants submitted evidence about the amount at stake, they did not establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction.

Judge Gregory H. Woods remanded the case to New York state court and directed the Clerk to close the federal case. The opinion refers to both Bronx County and New York County in describing the state-court destination.

The detailed version

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

Case
Davila v. Intren LLC · No. 1:22-cv-01558
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
Mar. 8, 2022

Background

The action was removed from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Bronx, on February 24, 2022. The defendants relied on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, asserting that the parties were citizens of different states and that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.

The court had previously ordered the defendants to explain why the case should remain in federal court. The court stated that diversity jurisdiction requires complete diversity, meaning that every defendant must be a citizen of a different state from every plaintiff. It also explained that a limited liability company’s citizenship is determined by the citizenship of each of its members. The defendants had described Intren LLC as a resident of Illinois but had not identified the citizenship of its members.

Court’s Analysis

The defendants responded with evidence addressing whether more than $75,000 was at stake. They did not, however, provide information about the citizenship of Intren LLC’s individual members. The court therefore found that the defendants had not established complete diversity or otherwise shown that the federal court had subject-matter jurisdiction.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), a federal court must send a removed case back to state court if it appears before final judgment that the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.

Ruling

Judge Gregory H. Woods ordered that the matter be remanded to the Supreme Court of the State of New York and directed the Clerk to remand it without delay and close the federal case. The opinion’s text contains an internal inconsistency: one paragraph refers to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, while the Clerk’s directive refers to County of Bronx, the court from which the action was removed.

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.