GORDON v. TUNIS

S.D. Indiana

GORDON v. TUNIS

DecidedSeptember 14, 2020

Docket1:20-cv-02300

StatusUnknown

This text of GORDON v. TUNIS (GORDON v. TUNIS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Indiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

GORDON v. TUNIS, (S.D. Ind. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

COLLEEN GORDON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:20-cv-02300-JPH-MJD ) EVAN TUNIS, ) E & M GLOBAL INSURANCE, ) ETS INSURANCE SOLUTIONS, INC., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER ON JURISDICTION

Plaintiff Colleen Gordon has filed a complaint alleging diversity jurisdiction over this matter. Dkt. 1. For the Court to have diversity jurisdiction, the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and the litigation must be between citizens of different states. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). The citizenship of an individual is not based on where the individual resides, but on where the individual is a citizen. Hunter v. Amin, 583 F.3d 486, 491 (7th Cir. 2009). And a corporation is a citizen of any state in which it is incorporated and of the state in which it has its principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1); see Smoot v. Mazda Motors of Am., Inc., 469 F.3d 675, 676 (7th Cir. 2006). Here, Ms. Gordon's complaint does not identify the citizenship of Defendant Evan Tunis. See dkt. 1 at 2. And while it states that Defendants E & M Global Insurance and ETS Insurance Company are corporations, it does not identify either company's principal place of business. Id. at 1–2. A federal court always has the responsibility to ensure it has jurisdiction. Hukic v. Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420, 427 (7th Cir. 2009). The Court's obligation includes knowing the details of the underlying jurisdictional allegations. See Evergreen Square of Cudahy v. Wis. Hous. and Econ. Dev. Auth., 776 F.3d 463, 465 (7th Cir. 2015). Therefore, the Court ORDERS Ms. Gordon to file a jurisdictional statement by October 16, 2020, addressing the issues identified in this order. SO ORDERED. Date: 9/14/2020

Sjamu Patrick ltawloe James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge Distribution: Southern District of Indiana Denise M. Clark CLARK LAW GROUP, PLLC dmclark@benefitcounsel.com

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

COLLEEN GORDON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:20-cv-02300-JPH-MJD ) EVAN TUNIS, ) E & M GLOBAL INSURANCE, ) ETS INSURANCE SOLUTIONS, INC., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER ON JURISDICTION

Plaintiff Colleen Gordon has filed a complaint alleging diversity jurisdiction over this matter. Dkt. 1. For the Court to have diversity jurisdiction, the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and the litigation must be between citizens of different states. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). The citizenship of an individual is not based on where the individual resides, but on where the individual is a citizen. Hunter v. Amin, 583 F.3d 486, 491 (7th Cir. 2009). And a corporation is a citizen of any state in which it is incorporated and of the state in which it has its principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1); see Smoot v. Mazda Motors of Am., Inc., 469 F.3d 675, 676 (7th Cir. 2006). Here, Ms. Gordon's complaint does not identify the citizenship of Defendant Evan Tunis. See dkt. 1 at 2. And while it states that Defendants E & M Global Insurance and ETS Insurance Company are corporations, it does not identify either company's principal place of business. Id. at 1–2. A federal court always has the responsibility to ensure it has jurisdiction. Hukic v. Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420, 427 (7th Cir. 2009). The Court's obligation includes knowing the details of the underlying jurisdictional allegations. See Evergreen Square of Cudahy v. Wis. Hous. and Econ. Dev. Auth., 776 F.3d 463, 465 (7th Cir. 2015). Therefore, the Court ORDERS Ms. Gordon to file a jurisdictional statement by October 16, 2020, addressing the issues identified in this order. SO ORDERED. Date: 9/14/2020

Sjamu Patrick ltawloe James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge Distribution: Southern District of Indiana Denise M. Clark CLARK LAW GROUP, PLLC dmclark@benefitcounsel.com

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

GORDON v. TUNIS, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-tunis-insd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack