The opinion of the court was delivered by: Robert P. Patterson, Jr., U.S.D.J.
On July 3, 2008, Plaintiffs BC Media Funding II, LLC and Media Funding Company, LLC ("Plaintiffs") commenced this action by filing a motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint in New York State Supreme Court, New York County. See N.Y.C.P.L.R. § 3213. Defendants Frank Lazauskas, Michael L. Metter, Leonard F. Moscati, and B. Michael Pisani ("Defendants" or "Guarantors") filed a Notice of Removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1441 on July 9, 2008.
The action sought to enforce individual Guaranty Agreements made by Defendants in connection with a Financing Agreement in which Media Funding Company, LLC ("Media Funding") agreed to extend term loans to BusinessTalkradio.net, Inc. ("BTR") in the aggregate principal amount of $5.5 million. The Guaranty Agreements were between BC Media Funding Company II ("BCMF") and the Defendants. The Court granted Plaintiffs' motion in an Opinion and Order dated October 24, 2008 and entered a Final Judgment for Plaintiffs on October 31, 2008.
Currently before the Court are two motions brought by Plaintiffs: (1) a motion for an order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 21 to drop Media Funding Company LLC as a Plaintiff in this case and removing it from the Judgment, and (2) a motion for an order authorizing registration of Judgment in favor of BCMF in the Districts of Connecticut and New Jersey. For the reasons that follow, Plaintiffs' motions are granted.
I.PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR AN ORDER PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 21 DROPPING PLAINTIFF MEDIA FUNDING COMPANY LLC FROM THIS CASE AND FROM THE JUDGMENT*fn1
In their Removal Notice of July 9, 2008, Defendants certified, through their counsel Scott Rosen, that "[t]he controversy in this action is wholly between citizens of different states." (Declaration of Kara L. Gorycki, executed December 17, 2008 ("Gorycki Decl.") Ex. A., Notice of Removal, ¶ 5). Defendants' Removal Notice indicates that two of the Defendants, Michael Metter and Leonard Moscati, are residents of Connecticut, while a third, B. Michael Pisani, is a resident of New Jersey. It further states that "defendant Frank Lazauskas at all relevant times has been and is an individual citizen and resident of the State of Connecticut." (Id. ¶ 5(b).)
Defendants' Removal Notice stated that both Plaintiffs Media Funding and BCMF were Delaware limited liability companies with their principal places of business in New York. (Id. ¶ 5(e), ¶ 5(f).) Defendants' basis for removal was diversity of citizenship in that the Court has "original jurisdiction of the.action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332" because "none of the Defendants are citizens or residents of the State of New York."
On December 11, 2008, subsequent to entry of Judgment, Plaintiffs' counsel received a letter from Craig Hilliard of the New Jersey law firm of Stark & Stark P.C., as new counsel to Defendant Frank Lazauskas, stating that Media Funding is a limited liability company and under the law is treated like a partnership for purposes of determining citizenship. (Gorycki Decl. Ex. B.) See, e.g., Handelsman v. Bedford Vill. Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 213 F.3d 48, 54 (2d Cir. 2000) (limited liability company has citizenship of its membership). Upon review of the case law and residences of Media Funding's principals, Plaintiffs agreed. (Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for An Order Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 21, dated December 17, 2008 ("Plaintiffs' Mem."), page 2.) The parties now agree that Media Funding is to be treated as a New Jersey citizen and that complete diversity between the parties does not exist.*fn2
(See Declaration of Jacob Barker ("Barker Decl."), executed December 16, 2008, ¶ 4.)
Plaintiffs seek to drop Media Funding from this action and from the Judgment. The remaining Plaintiff, BCMF, is a New York citizen because it has only one member, Jacob Barker, who is a resident of New York. (Barker Decl. ¶ 2.) Plaintiffs assert that the Court should drop Media Funding as a party to this action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 21 because BCMF could have proceeded as the sole Plaintiff in this case and Media Funding is a dispensable party.
"[I]t is well settled that Rule 21 [of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] invests district courts with authority to allow a dispensable nondiverse party to be dropped at any time, even after judgment has been rendered." Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 832 (1989). Fed. R. Civ. P. 21 authorizes a district court to drop a party from an action "at any time, [and] on just terms," and the Supreme Court has noted that resort to Rule 21 is particularly appropriate where the parties have proceeded through summary judgment or trial before the jurisdictional defect is detected. See id. at 836. Prior to exercising its ...