Jordan's Ladder Legal Placements, LLC v. Major, Lindsey & Africa, LLC
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:21-cv-07124
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jordan’s Ladder Legal Placements v. Major, Judge McMahon ordered both firms to disclose their members’ citizenship because federal jurisdiction may be lacking.
Jordan’s Ladder Legal Placements, LLC and Major, Lindsey & Africa, LLC, which were ordered to provide information about every member’s state of residence.
What happened
Jordan’s Ladder Legal Placements, LLC sued Major, Lindsey & Africa, LLC over a contract-related dispute. Both companies are limited liability companies, and the complaint only generally alleged that they were citizens of different states.
Judge McMahon explained that an LLC’s federal-court citizenship depends on the citizenship of every member. The court also said that the federal Declaratory Judgment Act does not create federal jurisdiction when the underlying claim is a state-law claim, such as the alleged tortious interference with contract here.
The court did not decide the merits or dismiss the case. Judge McMahon ordered both parties to file, under oath by noon on May 6, 2022, the state of residence of every member of each LLC so the court could assess its subject-matter jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- Jordan's Ladder Legal Placements, LLC v. Major, Lindsey & Africa, LLC · No. 1:21-cv-07124
- Colleen McMahon
- May 3, 2022
Background
Jordan’s Ladder Legal Placements, LLC brought claims against Major, Lindsey & Africa, LLC. The opinion describes the parties as two limited liability companies engaged in legal recruiting. The complaint alleged, in general terms, that the parties were citizens of different states, but it did not identify the citizenship of every member of either LLC.
Jurisdiction issue
Federal courts may hear state-law claims under diversity jurisdiction only when the opposing parties are completely diverse. For an LLC, citizenship is determined by the citizenship of each member, not merely by the company’s place of incorporation or principal place of business. The court therefore needed information about every member of both LLCs.
The opinion identifies the only coercive claim as a state-law claim for tortious interference with contract. It also explains that the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201(a), does not independently create federal jurisdiction. Because the underlying claim was based on state law, the declaratory-judgment claim could proceed in federal court only if another basis for jurisdiction—such as complete diversity—existed.
Order
The court did not determine whether complete diversity existed, decide the tortious-interference claim, or dismiss the case. Instead, it ordered the parties to file a statement under oath identifying the state of residence of every member of each LLC by 12:00 noon on Friday, May 6, 2022. The requested information was intended to allow the court to determine whether it had subject-matter jurisdiction.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.