Connolly v. Foreman

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: January 17, 2020
• Docket: 1:19-cv-07469
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK eee mee nen eee re nn ene een nn een ee ee en eee ee HX YVONNE CONNOLLY Plaintiff, 19 cv 7469 (PKC) -against- ORDER KEVIN J FOREMAN, Defendants. ee ee en ee ee nnn nn nn oe en eX CASTEL, U.S.D.J.: Plaintiff is a citizen of the Republic of Ireland. (Doc 20.) She brings this action invoking subject matter jurisdiction by reason of diversity of citizenship, 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Defendant has now disclosed that he is a citizen of Canada, (Doc 22.). “The rule of complete diversity——that no plaintiff and no defendant may be a cit- izen of the same state—applies to alienage cases as well as to ordinary diversity cases.” F. & H.R. Farman-Farmaian Consulting Engineers Firm v. Harza Eng'g Co., 882 F.2d 281, 284 (7th Cir. 1989) (citing Newman—Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo—Larrain, 109 S. Ct. 2218, 2221 (1989), And, “the presence of aliens on two sides of a case destroys diversity jurisdiction,” just like the presence of two citizens of the same state. Corporacion Venezolana de Fomento v. Vintero Sales Corp., 629 F.2d 786, 790 (2d Cir, 1980). There is no subject matter jurisdiction because there are aliens on both sides of the case. The action is DISMISSED. The Clerk shall close the case.

De

SO ORDERED. Do P, Z Castel United States District Judge

Dated: New York, New York January 17, 2020