Coleman v. Dollar Tree Stores

M.D. Alabama

Coleman v. Dollar Tree Stores

DecidedJanuary 28, 2020

Docket2:20-cv-00057

StatusUnknown

This text of Coleman v. Dollar Tree Stores (Coleman v. Dollar Tree Stores) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Coleman v. Dollar Tree Stores, (M.D. Ala. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

DENNIS COLEMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:20cv57-MHT ) (WO) DOLLAR TREE STORES, ) ) Defendants )

ORDER The allegations of the notice of removal are insufficient to invoke this court's removal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 (diversity of citizenship) 1441 (removal). To invoke removal jurisdiction based on diversity, the notice of removal must distinctly and affirmatively allege each party's citizenship. See McGovern v. American Airlines, Inc., 511 F. 2d 653, 654 (5th Cir. 1975) (per curiam). The allegations must show that the citizenship of each plaintiff is different from that of each defendant. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; see also 2 James Wm. Moore, et al., Moore's Federal Practice § 8.03[5][b] at 8-16 (3d ed. 2006). The removal notice is insufficient because it does

not properly allege the citizenship of defendant Dollar Tree Stores, which, according to the notice of removal, is a limited liability corporation. “[L]ike a limited partnership, a limited liability company is a citizen

of any state of which a member of the company is a citizen.” Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings L.L.C., 374 F.3d 1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004). The complaint must therefore allege “the citizenships

of all the members of the limited liability company.” Id. (And if the entity consists of several entities, the complaint must reflect the citizenship, or citizenships, of each and every entity based on the

nature of that entity.) ***

2 It is therefore the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that the defendant has until February 10, 2020, to amend the notice of removal to allege

jurisdiction sufficiently, see 28 U.S.C. § 1653; otherwise this lawsuit shall be remanded to state court. DONE, this the 28th day of January, 2020.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

DENNIS COLEMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:20cv57-MHT ) (WO) DOLLAR TREE STORES, ) ) Defendants )

ORDER The allegations of the notice of removal are insufficient to invoke this court's removal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 (diversity of citizenship) 1441 (removal). To invoke removal jurisdiction based on diversity, the notice of removal must distinctly and affirmatively allege each party's citizenship. See McGovern v. American Airlines, Inc., 511 F. 2d 653, 654 (5th Cir. 1975) (per curiam). The allegations must show that the citizenship of each plaintiff is different from that of each defendant. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; see also 2 James Wm. Moore, et al., Moore's Federal Practice § 8.03[5][b] at 8-16 (3d ed. 2006). The removal notice is insufficient because it does

not properly allege the citizenship of defendant Dollar Tree Stores, which, according to the notice of removal, is a limited liability corporation. “[L]ike a limited partnership, a limited liability company is a citizen

of any state of which a member of the company is a citizen.” Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings L.L.C., 374 F.3d 1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004). The complaint must therefore allege “the citizenships

of all the members of the limited liability company.” Id. (And if the entity consists of several entities, the complaint must reflect the citizenship, or citizenships, of each and every entity based on the

nature of that entity.) ***

2 It is therefore the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that the defendant has until February 10, 2020, to amend the notice of removal to allege

jurisdiction sufficiently, see 28 U.S.C. § 1653; otherwise this lawsuit shall be remanded to state court. DONE, this the 28th day of January, 2020.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Coleman v. Dollar Tree Stores, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-dollar-tree-stores-almd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack