Kohler v. CRST Expedited, Inc.
This text of Kohler v. CRST Expedited, Inc. (Kohler v. CRST Expedited, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
KIMBERLY A. KOHLER, Administrator Ad Pros Estate of the Estate of Marsada Mae Connors, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. Case No. 21-1359 JPG
CRST EXPEDITED, INC., d/b/a CRST the Transportation Solutions, Inc., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In light of Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals admonitions, see Foster v. Hill, 497 F.3d 695, 696-97 (7th Cir. 2007), the Court has undertaken a rigorous initial review of pleadings to ensure that jurisdiction has been properly pled. See Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 94 (2010) (noting courts’ “independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even when no party challenges it”). The Court has noted the following defect in the jurisdictional allegations of the Notice of Removal (Doc. 1) filed by defendants: Failure to allege the citizenship of decedent. A complaint asserting diversity jurisdiction must allege the citizenship of individual parties. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Where a suit is brought on behalf of the estate of a decedent, the citizenship of the legal representative of the estate shall be deemed to be that of the decedent. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(2); see Gustafson v. zumBrunnen, 546 F.3d 398, 400-01 (7th Cir. 2008); Konradi v. United States, 919 F.2d 1207, 1214 (7th Cir. 1990). Allegations of “residence” are jurisdictionally insufficient. Steigleder v. McQuesten, 198 U.S. 141 (1905). The defendants’ notice of removal alleges the plaintiffs’ citizenship but not the decedents’ citizenship before their death.
The Court hereby ORDERS Defendants shall have up to and including November 12, 2021 to amend the faulty pleading to correct the jurisdictional defects. See 28 U.S.C. § subject matter jurisdiction will satisfy this order. Defendants are directed to consult Local Rule 15.1 regarding amended pleadings and need not seek leave of Court to file such amended pleading.
IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: November 2, 2021
s/J. Phil Gilbert J. PHIL GILBERT DISTRICT JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Kohler v. CRST Expedited, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kohler-v-crst-expedited-inc-ilsd-2021.