Kavanna v. Lawro

Background

W. Ashwood Kavanna, proceeding without a lawyer and using the federal fee-waiver process, alleged that defendants breached an oral agreement. He said the parties agreed to include his painting, “Artemisia Man-Slams Putin,” in an auction at the Blue and Gold Gala, and that he altered the painting and promoted the event after defendants requested those actions. He alleged that defendants later removed the painting from the auction without cause or notice. He sought injunctive relief and an order to “impound gross ticket sales.”

Kavanna invoked diversity jurisdiction, which allows a federal court to hear certain disputes between citizens of different states when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. The court also considered whether any federal-question jurisdiction existed, but found no apparent basis for it.

Jurisdictional deficiencies

The court held that Kavanna had not met his burden to show diversity jurisdiction. First, he provided business addresses for individual defendants rather than facts showing where they were domiciled. Second, he did not plead the citizenship of all members of Atlanta Music Fund, LLC, as required for determining a limited liability company’s citizenship. Third, his allegations stated that he was a New York citizen and that defendants Dana Lawro, the Ukrainian American Youth Association (UAYA), the Ukraine American Youth Association (CYMA), and Hotel Edison were also New York citizens. That meant diversity of citizenship was not complete. Finally, Kavanna did not allege facts showing that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3). It directed the Clerk of Court to hold the matter open and granted Kavanna 30 days to amend his complaint to replead subject matter jurisdiction. The court identified possible amendments concerning dropping dispensable nondiverse defendants, pleading facts showing diverse citizenship between Kavanna and every remaining defendant, and alleging facts showing that more than $75,000 was at stake. The opinion states that judgment dismissing the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction would be entered if Kavanna did not timely amend.

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. The court did not decide whether the alleged oral agreement was breached.