Mausner v. Mausner

S.D. New York

Mausner v. Mausner

DecidedFebruary 7, 2023

Docket1:23-cv-00994

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Mausner v. Mausner, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK wee KX IRENA K. MAUSNER, individually and as trustee of the : IRENA K. MAUSNER REVOCABLE TRUST U/A/D ©: MAY 16, 2022, : : 23-CV-994 (JMF) Plaintiff, : : ORDER -v- : IAN O. MAUSNER, : Defendant. : wee KX JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: On February 6, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in which she invoked the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. See ECF No. 1,918. Although Plaintiff alleges that the parties “are citizens of different states,” id., she merely pleads her and Defendant’s states of residence, not their states of citizenship. /d. 13, 15. This is not enough. For the purpose of diversity jurisdiction, “a statement of the parties’ residence is insufficient to establish their citizenship.” Leveraged Leasing Admin. Corp. v. PacifiCorp Capital, Inc., 87 F.3d 44, 47 (2d Cir. 1996); see also, e.g., Linardos v. Fortuna, 157 F.3d 945, 948 (2d Cir. 1998) (“For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a party’s citizenship depends on his domicile.”); Canedy v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 126 F.3d 100, 103 (2d Cir. 1997) (“[A[llegations of residency alone cannot establish citizenship . . . .”). Accordingly, no later than February 14, 2023, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint properly alleging the citizenship of each party. If, by that date, Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint establishing this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, the Court will dismiss the case without prejudice and without further notice to any party.

SO ORDERED. Dated: February 7, 2023 New York, New York ESSE RMAN nited States District Judge

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK wee KX IRENA K. MAUSNER, individually and as trustee of the : IRENA K. MAUSNER REVOCABLE TRUST U/A/D ©: MAY 16, 2022, : : 23-CV-994 (JMF) Plaintiff, : : ORDER -v- : IAN O. MAUSNER, : Defendant. : wee KX JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: On February 6, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in which she invoked the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. See ECF No. 1,918. Although Plaintiff alleges that the parties “are citizens of different states,” id., she merely pleads her and Defendant’s states of residence, not their states of citizenship. /d. 13, 15. This is not enough. For the purpose of diversity jurisdiction, “a statement of the parties’ residence is insufficient to establish their citizenship.” Leveraged Leasing Admin. Corp. v. PacifiCorp Capital, Inc., 87 F.3d 44, 47 (2d Cir. 1996); see also, e.g., Linardos v. Fortuna, 157 F.3d 945, 948 (2d Cir. 1998) (“For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a party’s citizenship depends on his domicile.”); Canedy v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 126 F.3d 100, 103 (2d Cir. 1997) (“[A[llegations of residency alone cannot establish citizenship . . . .”). Accordingly, no later than February 14, 2023, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint properly alleging the citizenship of each party. If, by that date, Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint establishing this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, the Court will dismiss the case without prejudice and without further notice to any party.

SO ORDERED. Dated: February 7, 2023 New York, New York ESSE RMAN nited States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Mausner v. Mausner, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mausner-v-mausner-nysd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack