Provident Group EMU Properties LLC v. Eastern Michigan University, Board of Regents

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

PROVIDENT GROUP – EMU PROPERTIES LLC, et al.,

Plaintiffs, Case No. 23-10644 v. Honorable Victoria A. Roberts

THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF EASTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY,

Defendant. ______________________________/

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Plaintiffs brings this case against The Board of Regents of Eastern Michigan University. They allege four counts of breach of contract and a count for declaratory judgment. Plaintiffs say the Court has diversity jurisdiction over the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because “there is complete diversity of citizenship among the parties.” However, for purposes of this suit, Eastern Michigan University is a state entity and/or arm of the State of Michigan. See Est. of Ritter v. Univ. of Michigan, 851 F.2d 846, 851 (6th Cir. 1988); Hill v. Bd. of Trustees of Michigan State Univ., 182 F. Supp. 2d 621, 625 (W.D. Mich. 2001); Mich. Const. Art. 8, § 4 (“The legislature shall appropriate moneys to maintain . . . Eastern Michigan University. . . .”). It is well-settled that a state is not a “citizen” for purposes of diversity jurisdiction; this also applies to any entity that is an arm or alter ego of the

state. Moor v. Alameda Cnty., 411 U.S. 693, 717 (1973); Lansing Cmty. Coll. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, No. 09-CV-111, 2009 WL 3336067, at *1 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 14, 2009) (citing State Highway

Comm'n v. Utah Constr. Co., 278 U.S. 194, 199 (1929)). Because The Board of Regents of Eastern Michigan University is not a “citizen” for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, diversity jurisdiction does not exist, and the Court must dismiss the case for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction. The Court DISMISSES the case WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS ORDERED.

s/ Victoria A. Roberts Victoria A. Roberts United States District Judge

Dated: March 22, 2023