Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 6, 2023

HBC US Holdings LLC v. Everest Indemnity Insurance Company

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:23-cv-02816
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureInsurance
In one sentence

In HBC US Holdings v. Everest Indemnity, Judge Torres ordered Everest to clarify HBC’s citizenship or face remand for possible lack of jurisdiction.

Who this affects

HBC US Holdings LLC and Everest Indemnity Insurance Company are affected. Everest must clarify HBC’s legal form or provide the citizenship information required for diversity jurisdiction; otherwise, if HBC is an LLC and complete diversity is not truthfully alleged, the case will be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

What happened

HBC US Holdings LLC v. Everest Indemnity Insurance Company concerns Everest’s removal of the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, which generally requires the parties to be citizens of different states. HBC’s filing described it as a New York corporation, but its name suggested that it might instead be a limited liability company.

The court explained that an LLC’s citizenship depends on the citizenship of each of its members and, for corporate members, their state of incorporation and principal place of business. The court ordered Everest by April 12, 2023, either to confirm that HBC is a corporation or to amend its removal notice with the required citizenship information.

Judge Analisa Torres stated that if HBC is an LLC and Everest does not truthfully allege complete diversity by the deadline, the case will be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order did not decide the underlying dispute between the parties.

The detailed version

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

Case
HBC US Holdings LLC v. Everest Indemnity Insurance Company · No. 1:23-cv-02816
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Apr. 6, 2023

Background

Everest Indemnity Insurance Company removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Everest invoked diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a basis for federal jurisdiction that depends on the parties’ citizenship and the amount in dispute.

The removal notice identified HBC US Holdings LLC as the plaintiff and attached HBC’s petition. That petition stated that HBC “is a New York corporation duly incorporated with its principal place of business in New York.” The court noted that HBC’s name suggested it might instead be a limited liability company.

Jurisdictional issue

The court explained that if HBC is an LLC, the removal notice must identify the citizenship of each natural-person member and the state of incorporation and principal place of business of each corporate member. For diversity jurisdiction, an LLC has the citizenship of each of its members.

Order

The court ordered Everest, by April 12, 2023, either to confirm whether HBC is a corporation or to amend its removal notice to allege the citizenship of every constituent person or entity if HBC is an LLC. Judge Analisa Torres further stated that if HBC is an LLC and Everest does not timely and truthfully allege complete diversity, the case will be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

The order addressed only the basis for federal jurisdiction and did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute.

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.