SWEETWATER MARINE, LLC v. AMERICAN COMMERCIAL BARGE LINE, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana
DecidedJanuary 9, 2023
Docket4:23-cv-00001
StatusUnknown

This text of SWEETWATER MARINE, LLC v. AMERICAN COMMERCIAL BARGE LINE, LLC (SWEETWATER MARINE, LLC v. AMERICAN COMMERCIAL BARGE LINE, LLC) 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
SWEETWATER MARINE, LLC v. AMERICAN COMMERCIAL BARGE LINE, LLC, (S.D. Ind. 2023).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA NEW ALBANY DIVISION

SWEETWATER MARINE, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:23-cv-00001-TWP-KMB ) AMERICAN COMMERCIAL BARGE LINE, ) LLC, ) COMMERCIAL BARGE LINE COMPANY, ) and OLD JB LLC, ) ) Defendants. )

ENTRY ON JURISDICTION It has come to the Court's attention that Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The Complaint alleges that this Court has jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. However, the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of the parties. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional purposes. See Meyerson v. Harrah's East Chicago Casino, 299 F.3d 616, 617 (7th Cir. 2002) ("residence and citizenship are not synonyms and it is the latter that matters for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction"). "For diversity jurisdiction purposes, the citizenship of an LLC is the citizenship of each of its members." Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007). "Consequently, an LLC's jurisdictional statement must identify the citizenship of each of its members as of the date the complaint or notice of removal was filed, and, if those members have members, the citizenship of those members as well." Id. Furthermore, jurisdictional allegations must be made on personal knowledge, not on information and belief, to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of a federal court. See America's Best Inns, Inc. v. Best Inns of Abilene, L.P., 980 F.2d 1072, 1074 (7th Cir. 1992) (only a statement about jurisdiction "made on personal knowledge has any value," and a statement made "'to the best of my knowledge and belief' is insufficient" to invoke diversity jurisdiction "because it says nothing about citizenship"); Page v. Wright, 116 F.2d 449, 451 (7th Cir. 1940) (an allegation of a

party's citizenship for diversity purposes that is "made only upon information and belief" is unsupported). The Complaint alleges, 1. Plaintiff, Sweetwater Marine, LLC f/k/a Ashton Marine, LLC ("Ashton"), is a Michigan limited liability company with its principal office located at 10 Clinton Avenue, Apt. D, Grand Haven, Michigan 49417.

2. Defendant, American Commercial Barge Line, LLC ("ACBL") is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal office located at 1701 East Market Street, Jeffersonville, Indiana 47130.

3. Defendant, Commercial Barge Line Company ("CBLC"), is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at 1701 East Market Street, Jeffersonville, Indiana 47130. CBLC is, upon information and belief, the sole member of ACBL.

4. Defendant, Old JB LLC f/k/a Jeffboat LLC ("Jeffboat") is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal office located at 1701 East Market Street, Jeffersonville, Indiana 47130. CBLC is, upon information and belief, the sole member of Old JB as well.

(Filing No. 1 at 2.) These allegations are insufficient to allege the citizenship of Plaintiff Ashton to allow the Court to determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists because the allegations fail to state the members of Ashton and their citizenship. Additionally, the allegations made "upon information and belief" are not sufficient to support jurisdiction. As the party asking this Court to invoke its jurisdiction, Plaintiff must properly allege the citizenship of each of the parties to establish subject matter jurisdiction. See Schur v. L.A. Weight Loss Ctrs., Inc., 577 F.3d 752, 758 (7th Cir. 2009); Doe v. Allied-Signal, Inc., 985 F.2d 908, 911 (7th Cir. 1993). Therefore, the Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement that establishes the Court's jurisdiction over this case. This statement should specifically identify the members of the LLC parties and their citizenship. This jurisdictional statement is due fourteen (14) days from the date of this Entry. SO ORDERED.

Hon. Tan¥a Walton Pratt, Chief Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana

Distribution: Kevin Alexander Imhof Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC kevin.imhof@skofirm.com

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

Related

Jane Doe v. Allied-Signal, Inc.
985 F.2d 908 (Seventh Circuit, 1993)
Norman Meyerson v. Harrah's East Chicago Casino
299 F.3d 616 (Seventh Circuit, 2002)
Carl E. Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC
487 F.3d 531 (Seventh Circuit, 2007)
Schur v. L.A. Weight Loss Centers, Inc.
577 F.3d 752 (Seventh Circuit, 2009)
Page v. Wright
116 F.2d 449 (Seventh Circuit, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
SWEETWATER MARINE, LLC v. AMERICAN COMMERCIAL BARGE LINE, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sweetwater-marine-llc-v-american-commercial-barge-line-llc-insd-2023.