Conway v. Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company

N.D. Illinois

Conway v. Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company

DecidedFebruary 23, 2024

Docket3:22-cv-50230

StatusUnknown

This text of Conway v. Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company (Conway v. Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Conway v. Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company, (N.D. Ill. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS WESTERN DIVISION

Gary Conway,

Plaintiff, Case No. 3:22-cv-50230 v. Honorable Iain D. Johnston Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company et al.,

Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pro se plaintiff Gary Conway continues this action against Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company and its president, Joel Schwartz, with an amended complaint alleging that he is entitled to relief because Colonial Penn sold to his sister an “unauthorized” and “fraudulent” policy insuring his life and now refuses to disclose to him any information about it.1 Dkt. 44 at 3, 9. Conway’s amended complaint continues to fail to establish this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. “The party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing that it exists.” Sykes v. Cook Inc., 72 F.4th 195, 205 (7th Cir. 2023). Conway’s complaint refers in passing to a violation of his “constitutional rights.” Dkt. 44 at 7. As the defendants note, this is not a “serious effort” to invoke federal question jurisdiction, and thus represents a waiver of any such argument.

1 There is also some discussion about how, in 2015, “these people orchestrated” a hernia repair surgery—the significance of this to his claim is entirely unclear. Dkt. 44 at 7-8, 14. Dkt. 47 at 2. Even if the merits were reached, the Court cannot discern any conceivable basis for federal question jurisdiction as Conway has pleaded his claim. This theory of jurisdiction therefore fails. “When the parties allege residence but not citizenship, the court must dismiss the suit.” Guar. Nat. Title Co. v. J.E.G. Assocs., 101 F.3d 57, 59 (7th Cir. 1996). A fortiori, because Conway has failed to allege either residency or citizenship, without any other basis of jurisdiction, this suit must be dismissed. A dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be without prejudice. This action is terminated.

Date: February 23, 2024 SS. Honorable Iain D. Johnston United States District Judge

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS WESTERN DIVISION

Gary Conway,

Plaintiff, Case No. 3:22-cv-50230 v. Honorable Iain D. Johnston Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company et al.,

Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pro se plaintiff Gary Conway continues this action against Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company and its president, Joel Schwartz, with an amended complaint alleging that he is entitled to relief because Colonial Penn sold to his sister an “unauthorized” and “fraudulent” policy insuring his life and now refuses to disclose to him any information about it.1 Dkt. 44 at 3, 9. Conway’s amended complaint continues to fail to establish this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. “The party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing that it exists.” Sykes v. Cook Inc., 72 F.4th 195, 205 (7th Cir. 2023). Conway’s complaint refers in passing to a violation of his “constitutional rights.” Dkt. 44 at 7. As the defendants note, this is not a “serious effort” to invoke federal question jurisdiction, and thus represents a waiver of any such argument.

1 There is also some discussion about how, in 2015, “these people orchestrated” a hernia repair surgery—the significance of this to his claim is entirely unclear. Dkt. 44 at 7-8, 14. Dkt. 47 at 2. Even if the merits were reached, the Court cannot discern any conceivable basis for federal question jurisdiction as Conway has pleaded his claim. This theory of jurisdiction therefore fails. “When the parties allege residence but not citizenship, the court must dismiss the suit.” Guar. Nat. Title Co. v. J.E.G. Assocs., 101 F.3d 57, 59 (7th Cir. 1996). A fortiori, because Conway has failed to allege either residency or citizenship, without any other basis of jurisdiction, this suit must be dismissed. A dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be without prejudice. This action is terminated.

Date: February 23, 2024 SS. Honorable Iain D. Johnston United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Conway v. Colonial Penn Life Insurance Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conway-v-colonial-penn-life-insurance-company-ilnd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack