Stillman v. De Vos
- John Cronan
- 1:23-cv-07802
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Stillman v. De Vos, Judge Cronan ordered Stillman to plead citizenship or risk dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
Roy Stillman must provide allegations establishing his citizenship and Jacques De Vos’s citizenship by September 11, 2023. If he does not, the court may dismiss the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
What happened
In Stillman v. De Vos, Roy Stillman sued Jacques De Vos and others, claiming federal jurisdiction based on the parties’ citizenship. The complaint said Stillman resides in New York and De Vos lives in Paris, France.
The court explained that residence alone does not establish citizenship for diversity jurisdiction. It ordered Stillman to amend the complaint to allege his citizenship and De Vos’s citizenship by September 11, 2023.
Judge Cronan warned that if Stillman did not amend the complaint or otherwise establish jurisdiction under federal law, the court might dismiss the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction without further notice.
The detailed version
- Stillman v. De Vos · No. 1:23-cv-07802
- John Cronan
- Sept. 6, 2023
Background
Roy Stillman filed a complaint invoking diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The complaint alleged that Stillman resides in New York and that Jacques De Vos lives in Paris, France.
Court’s analysis
The court stated that residence alone is insufficient to establish a person’s domicile for jurisdictional purposes, and that a statement of residence is therefore insufficient to establish citizenship. Because the complaint did not adequately allege the parties’ citizenship, the court required additional information before determining whether diversity jurisdiction existed.
Order
The court ordered Stillman to amend his complaint by September 11, 2023, to allege the citizenship of Stillman and Jacques De Vos. The court stated that if Stillman failed to amend the complaint or otherwise properly establish jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, it might dismiss the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction without further notice.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court addressed whether it had subject-matter jurisdiction and did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.