Thomas v. Physician Affiliate Group of New York, P.C.

S.D. New York

Thomas v. Physician Affiliate Group of New York, P.C.

DecidedNovember 14, 2024

Docket1:24-cv-08573

StatusUnknown

This text of Thomas v. Physician Affiliate Group of New York, P.C. (Thomas v. Physician Affiliate Group of New York, P.C.) 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

Thomas v. Physician Affiliate Group of New York, P.C., (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK wee KX DONNA THOMAS, : Plaintiff, : : 24-CV-8573 (JMF) -v- : : ORDER PHYSICIAN AFFILIATE GROUP OF : NEW YORK, P.C., : Defendant. : wee KX JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: On November 12, 2024, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in which she invoked the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. See ECF No. 1,94. Although Plaintiff relies on the Court’s diversity jurisdiction, she merely alleges her state of residence, not her state of citizenship. /d. Jf] 1. This is not enough. See, e.g., Davis v. Cannick, No. 14-CV-7571 (SJF) (SIL), 2015 WL 1954491, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 29, 2015) (“[A] conclusory allegation in the Complaint regarding diversity of citizenship does not extinguish the Court’s responsibility to determine, on its own review of the pleadings, whether subject matter jurisdiction exists.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). For the purpose of diversity jurisdiction, “a statement of the parties’ residence is insufficient to establish their citizenship.” Leveraged Leasing Admin. Corp. 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 November 21, 2024, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint properly alleging the citizenship of each party to this action. 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: November 14, 2024 New York, New York JESS URMAN 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 DONNA THOMAS, : Plaintiff, : : 24-CV-8573 (JMF) -v- : : ORDER PHYSICIAN AFFILIATE GROUP OF : NEW YORK, P.C., : Defendant. : wee KX JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: On November 12, 2024, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in which she invoked the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. See ECF No. 1,94. Although Plaintiff relies on the Court’s diversity jurisdiction, she merely alleges her state of residence, not her state of citizenship. /d. Jf] 1. This is not enough. See, e.g., Davis v. Cannick, No. 14-CV-7571 (SJF) (SIL), 2015 WL 1954491, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 29, 2015) (“[A] conclusory allegation in the Complaint regarding diversity of citizenship does not extinguish the Court’s responsibility to determine, on its own review of the pleadings, whether subject matter jurisdiction exists.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). For the purpose of diversity jurisdiction, “a statement of the parties’ residence is insufficient to establish their citizenship.” Leveraged Leasing Admin. Corp. 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 November 21, 2024, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint properly alleging the citizenship of each party to this action. 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: November 14, 2024 New York, New York JESS URMAN nited States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Thomas v. Physician Affiliate Group of New York, P.C., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-physician-affiliate-group-of-new-york-pc-nysd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack