Monroe Staffing Services, LLC v. Whitaker
- George Daniels
- 1:20-cv-01716
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Monroe Staffing v. Whitaker: Judge Moses ordered plaintiffs to amend their complaint to support diversity jurisdiction.
Plaintiffs Monroe Staffing Services, LLC and Staffing 360 Solutions, Inc., who were required to file a further amended complaint addressing diversity jurisdiction.
What happened
In Monroe Staffing Services, LLC v. Whitaker, Monroe Staffing Services, LLC and Staffing 360 Solutions, Inc. were ordered to file another amended complaint.
The complaint must add facts supporting the court’s diversity jurisdiction, including the principal place of business of Monroe’s member, Faro Recruitment America, Inc. The plaintiffs had to file it by June 23, 2023.
Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses issued the order on June 9, 2023, for the reasons stated in a report and recommendation issued that day.
The detailed version
- Monroe Staffing Services, LLC v. Whitaker · No. 1:20-cv-01716
- George Daniels
- June 9, 2023
Background
The opinion is an order concerning the plaintiffs’ invocation of the court’s diversity jurisdiction. The order refers to a report and recommendation issued the same day but does not provide that report’s full reasoning.
Court’s Action
The court ordered Monroe Staffing Services, LLC and Staffing 360 Solutions, Inc. to file a further amended complaint by June 23, 2023. The amendment was limited to adequately alleging the facts needed to support diversity jurisdiction, including the principal place of business of Monroe’s member, Faro Recruitment America, Inc.
The order also reminded the plaintiffs that diversity jurisdiction depends on the parties’ citizenship when the action began. The opinion does not state that the case was dismissed or that jurisdiction was finally found to exist.
Judge and Result
Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses entered the order. The specific action was an order requiring a further amended complaint for the limited jurisdictional purpose described above.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.