Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 15, 2023

Russian School of Mathematics, Inc. v. Sinyavin

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:23-cv-08103
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Russian School of Mathematics v. Sinyavin: Judge Halpern ordered defendants to clarify Logicus’s citizenship supporting diversity jurisdiction after removal.

Who this affects

The defendants must provide additional information about Logicus, LLC’s citizenship and serve the order on the plaintiff through counsel. The order does not resolve the underlying claims.

What happened

Russian School of Mathematics sued Irene Sinyavin and Logicus, LLC in New York state court, and the defendants moved the case to federal court based on alleged diversity of citizenship.

The court found that the removal papers did not adequately identify Logicus’s citizenship. Because Logicus appeared to be a limited liability company rather than a corporation, its citizenship depends on the citizenship of all its members.

Judge Halpern ordered the defendants to file a letter by September 20, 2023, explaining why diversity jurisdiction exists and stating the citizenship of Logicus’s members, shareholders, partners, and trustees. The order did not decide whether federal jurisdiction ultimately exists.

The detailed version

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

Case
Russian School of Mathematics, Inc. v. Sinyavin · No. 7:23-cv-08103
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Sept. 15, 2023

Background

Russian School of Mathematics, Inc. began the action against Irene Sinyavin and Logicus, LLC in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Westchester, by serving and filing a summons and complaint on or about August 14, 2023. On September 13, 2023, the defendants removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under federal removal statutes.

The defendants relied on diversity jurisdiction, which can allow a federal court to hear a case involving citizens of different states. They alleged that the plaintiff was a Massachusetts corporation with its principal place of business in Newton, Massachusetts. They alleged that Sinyavin was a New York resident and that Logicus, LLC was organized under New York law and had its principal place of business in Larchmont, New York.

Court’s Analysis

The court observed that Logicus appeared to be a domestic limited liability company, not a corporation. A limited liability company receives its citizenship from each of its members. The notice of removal did not identify the citizenship of Logicus’s members and therefore did not adequately allege Logicus’s citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.

Order

The court ordered the defendants to file a letter through the electronic filing system by September 20, 2023, explaining the basis for their assertion that diversity jurisdiction exists. The letter must state the citizenship of each of Logicus’s members, shareholders, partners, and trustees. The defendants also must serve the order on the plaintiff by email through its counsel.

The order did not make a final determination that diversity jurisdiction exists or does not exist, and it did not address the underlying claims. Judge Philip M. Halpern entered the order on September 15, 2023.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.