Capital Investment PTY, LLC v. Onestone Capital, LLC
- Rochon
- 1:23-cv-04487
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Capital Investment PTY v. Onestone Capital, Judge Rochon ordered jurisdictional citizenship disclosures by June 7, warning the case could be dismissed.
Capital Investment PTY, LLC must provide sworn jurisdictional disclosures by June 7, 2023. Onestone Capital, LLC is affected because the court found that its citizenship had not been properly alleged, leaving federal jurisdiction unresolved.
What happened
Capital Investment PTY, LLC sued Onestone Capital, LLC, claiming federal jurisdiction because the parties were citizens of different states. The complaint identified alleged locations for both companies and identified Capital PTY’s sole member.
The court explained that a limited liability company’s citizenship depends on the citizenship of all its members. It found that Capital PTY had not properly alleged Onestone’s citizenship, so diversity jurisdiction had not been established.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered Capital PTY to file, by June 7, 2023, a letter supported by sworn affidavits identifying and stating the citizenship of the members of each limited liability company. Judge Rochon warned that the action would be dismissed without further notice if Capital PTY could not establish a good-faith basis for complete diversity.
The detailed version
- Capital Investment PTY, LLC v. Onestone Capital, LLC · No. 1:23-cv-04487
- Rochon
- May 31, 2023
Background
Capital Investment PTY, LLC filed its complaint on May 30, 2023. The complaint asserted subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship. It alleged that Onestone Capital, LLC was incorporated in New York and had its principal place of business in New York, New York. It alleged that Capital Investment PTY, LLC was incorporated in Florida and had its principal place of business in Miami, Florida. A separate disclosure stated that Adolfo Navas Diaz was Capital PTY’s sole member and was domiciled in Florida.
Jurisdictional Deficiency
The court explained that an LLC is considered a citizen of every state in which its members are citizens. If an LLC’s members include other non-corporate entities, the parties must identify and allege the citizenship of members through the ownership chain until the citizenship of every individual and corporation with a direct or indirect interest is provided. The court found that Capital PTY had not properly alleged Onestone’s citizenship and therefore had not adequately alleged diversity subject-matter jurisdiction.
Order
The court ordered Capital PTY to file, no later than June 7, 2023, a letter supported by one or more sworn affidavits providing the information needed for the court to exercise subject-matter jurisdiction, including the identity and citizenship of the members of each LLC. The court stated that, if Capital PTY could not allege a good-faith basis for complete diversity of citizenship, the action would be dismissed without further notice to the parties.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.