Murga v. Equity One (Northeast Portfolio), Inc.

S.D. New York

Murga v. Equity One (Northeast Portfolio), Inc.

DecidedFebruary 28, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-01689

StatusUnknown

This text of Murga v. Equity One (Northeast Portfolio), Inc. (Murga v. Equity One (Northeast Portfolio), Inc.) 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

Murga v. Equity One (Northeast Portfolio), Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

DOCUMENT | ELECTRONICALLY FILED | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT POC #: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ATE FILED: 9-36 YESSIKA MURGA, ee Plaintiff, -against- 25-cv-1689 (LAK) EQUITY ONE (NORTHEAST PORFOLIO), INC., et ano., Defendants rr rr er tr erm rr tte ee eee eee eee eee eee HX

ORDER

LEWIs A. KAPLAN, District Judge. Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 1441. The notice of removal fails adequately to allege the existence of subject matter jurisdiction because, perhaps among other things, it fails adequately to allege: & The citizenship of one or more natural persons. See, e.g., Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'n v. Edwards, 194 U.S. 377 (1904); Leveraged Leasing Administration Corp.v. PacifiCorp Capital, Inc., 87 F.3d 44 (2d Cir. 1996). O The citizenship of one or more corporations. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). x) The citizenship of one or more partnerships. See Carden y. Arkoma Assocs., 494 U.S. 195 (1990). O The exact nature and citizenship of one or more alleged limited liability companies. See Handlesman v. Bedford Village Green Assocs. L.P., 213 F.3d 48, 52 (2d Cir. 2000). Absent the filing, on or before March 10, 2025, of an amended notice of removal adequately alleging the existence of subject matter jurisdiction, this action will be remanded for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 28, 2025 lu, Lewis A. Kap United States DistrictJudge

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

DOCUMENT | ELECTRONICALLY FILED | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT POC #: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ATE FILED: 9-36 YESSIKA MURGA, ee Plaintiff, -against- 25-cv-1689 (LAK) EQUITY ONE (NORTHEAST PORFOLIO), INC., et ano., Defendants rr rr er tr erm rr tte ee eee eee eee eee eee HX

ORDER

LEWIs A. KAPLAN, District Judge. Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 1441. The notice of removal fails adequately to allege the existence of subject matter jurisdiction because, perhaps among other things, it fails adequately to allege: & The citizenship of one or more natural persons. See, e.g., Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'n v. Edwards, 194 U.S. 377 (1904); Leveraged Leasing Administration Corp.v. PacifiCorp Capital, Inc., 87 F.3d 44 (2d Cir. 1996). O The citizenship of one or more corporations. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). x) The citizenship of one or more partnerships. See Carden y. Arkoma Assocs., 494 U.S. 195 (1990). O The exact nature and citizenship of one or more alleged limited liability companies. See Handlesman v. Bedford Village Green Assocs. L.P., 213 F.3d 48, 52 (2d Cir. 2000). Absent the filing, on or before March 10, 2025, of an amended notice of removal adequately alleging the existence of subject matter jurisdiction, this action will be remanded for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 28, 2025 lu, Lewis A. Kap United States DistrictJudge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Murga v. Equity One (Northeast Portfolio), Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murga-v-equity-one-northeast-portfolio-inc-nysd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack