United States District Court, S.D. New York
February 13, 2004.
RICHARD B. COONS, Plaintiff, -against- UNITED STATES TRUST COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Defendant
The opinion of the court was delivered by: LEWIS KAPLAN, District Judge
The complaint in this purported diversity action failed adequately to
allege the citizenship either of the plaintiff, see 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); Depradine v. Nissan Infmiti
LT, No. 00 Civ. 6686 (LAK), 2000 WL 1280971, *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 11,
2000), or the defendant, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). The
Court therefore issued an order stating that the action would be
dismissed absent the filing of an amended complaint curing these
Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint which adequately alleges that
plaintiff is a citizen of Connecticut. With respect to the defendant, it
alleges only that it has its principal place of business in New York and
"thus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, . . . is a citizen of the
State of New York." Am. Cpt. ¶ 2. That of course is true. But
28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1) the statute the Court cited in the prior
order states that it is a citizen also of the state in which it
is incorporated. The amended complaint therefore fails adequately to
allege the citizenship of the defendant and the requisite complete
diversity between plaintiff and defendant.
Alleging diversity jurisdiction is not particularly difficult. One need
only read 28 U.S.C. § 1332, determine the material facts, and plug
those facts into Form 2(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Here,
despite the relevant authorities and the specific statute having been
called to counsel's attention by the Court, plaintiff still has not
adequately alleged jurisdiction. Accordingly, the action is dismissed for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.