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.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Hoffman

United States District Court, Seventh Circuit

October 8, 2013

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver of COUNTRY BANK, Plaintiff,
v.
KENNETH E. HOFFMAN, JR., Defendant.

ORDER

SARA DARROW, District Judge.

Plaintiff FDIC-Receiver alleges that Defendant Kenneth Hoffman, Jr. defaulted on a loan and breached the terms of a promissory note by failing to timely pay the principal and interest due under the note. FDIC-Receiver seeks to foreclose on financing bonds that secured the loan and promissory note, or a judgment against Hoffman in the amount of $1, 500, 000. FDIC-Receiver, however, has failed to establish this Court's subject-matter jurisdiction over its claims. Accordingly, the Court orders FDIC-Receiver to file a supplemental jurisdictional statement, in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(1), with factual allegations, assuming they exist, that establishes subject-matter jurisdiction.

A plaintiff's complaint must include "a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction." Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(1). Subject-matter jurisdiction is satisfied through either federal-question jurisdiction or diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction. Smart v. Local 702 Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 562 F.3d 798, 802 (7th Cir. 2009). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, the statute conferring federal-question jurisdiction to the district courts, "district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States." Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the statute conferring diversity jurisdiction, "[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75, 000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens of different states." 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). A district court has an obligation to review its own jurisdiction sua sponte. Ricketts v. Midwest Nat'l Bank, 874 F.2d 1177, 1181 (7th Cir. 1989).

FDIC-Receiver's complaint contains no statement of the grounds for the Court's jurisdiction. Absent subject-matter jurisdiction, this case cannot move forward. Therefore, the Court orders FDIC-Receiver to file a supplemental jurisdictional statement that includes factual allegations, assuming they exist, that establishes subject-matter jurisdiction. FDIC-Receiver has 14 days to comply with this order.


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.