Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 18, 2022

Edgewood Partners Insurance Center v. PPD Development, L.P.

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:22-cv-06957
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Edgewood Partners Insurance Center v. PPD Development, Judge Torres ordered an amendment clarifying the parties’ citizenship for diversity jurisdiction.

Who this affects

Edgewood Partners Insurance Center, as plaintiff, and PPD Development, L.P., as defendant; the order requires the plaintiff to provide additional jurisdictional allegations.

What happened

Edgewood Partners Insurance Center sued PPD Development, L.P., relying on federal diversity jurisdiction.

The complaint identified PPD Development as a limited partnership but did not list all of its partners or their citizenship. The court explained that a limited partnership’s citizenship depends on the citizenship of every partner.

Judge Torres ordered Edgewood Partners to amend its complaint by August 25, 2022, to allege all parties’ citizenship. The court said the complaint would be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction if the amendment did not establish complete diversity.

The detailed version

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

Case
Edgewood Partners Insurance Center v. PPD Development, L.P. · No. 1:22-cv-06957
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Aug. 18, 2022

Background

Edgewood Partners Insurance Center, doing business as Edgewood Partners Insurance Agency and identified as successor in interest to INTEGRO USA, Inc., brought the action against PPD Development, L.P. The complaint invoked diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

Jurisdictional Deficiency

Federal diversity jurisdiction requires the case to be between citizens of different states. The complaint alleged that PPD Development was a limited partnership but did not identify all of its members. The court explained that a limited partnership is not treated as a citizen only of the state where it was created; the court must consider the citizenship of all partners. Because the complaint omitted that information, it did not provide the required short and plain statement supporting federal jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(1).

Order

The court ordered Edgewood Partners to amend its pleading by August 25, 2022, to allege the citizenship of all parties. The court stated that if Edgewood Partners failed to amend the complaint to allege complete diversity, the complaint would be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order did not itself dismiss the complaint.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.