Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

AMERICAN HIGH-INCOME TRUST v. ALLIEDSIGNAL INC.

United States District Court, Southern District of New York


May 12, 2003

AMERICAN HIGH-INCOME TRUST, ET. AL., PLAINTIFF(S), AGAINST ALLIEDSIGNAL INC., ET. AL., DEFENDANT(S)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Laura Taylor Swain, District Judge.

ORDER

WHEREAS, the Amended Complaint in this action asserts that the Court has jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship (28 U.S.C. § 1332), but fails to allege the citizenship of the members of Plaintiff Trusts, the principal places of business of Plaintiff Corporations, or the citizenship of the Defendant Directors; and WHEREAS, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a coporation is deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), and the citizenship of an artificial business entity other than a corporation is determined by reference to the citizenship of its members, see C.T. Carden v. Arkoma Associates, 494 U.S. 185 (1990); E.R. Squibb & Sons v. Accident & Cas. Ins. Co., 160 F.3d 925 (2d Cir. 1998); Keith v. Black Diamond Advisors, Inc., 48 F. Supp.2d 326 (S.D.N.Y. 1999); and WHEREAS, "`subject matter jurisdiction is an unwaivable sine qua non for the exercise of federal judicial power,'" E.R. Squibb & Sons v. Accident & Cas. Ins. Co., 160 F.3d 925, 929 (2d Cir. 1998) (citation omitted), and Rule 12(h)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "[w]henever it appears by suggestion of the parties or otherwise that the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the action;" it is hereby

ORDERED, that in connection with the supplemental submission that is to be filed with the Court no later than May 19, 2003, Plaintiffs must indicate whether they continue to assert diversity jurisdiction and, if so, supplement the Amended Complaint with allegations as to the citizenship of the above-mentioned parties. Defendants shall respond to Plaintiffs' diversity jurisdiction supplement by May 26, 2003.

SO ORDERED.

20030512

© 1992-2003 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.