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.

Süd Family Limited Partnership v. Regions Bank

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Peoria Division

May 27, 2015

SÜD FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
REGIONS BANK and DCR MORTGAGE VI SUB IV, LLC, Defendants.

ORDER

JONATHAN E. HAWLEY, Magistrate Judge.

The Plaintiffs' Complaint asserts diversity of citizenship as the basis of the Court's subject matter jurisdiction. The allegations of the Complaint do not sufficiently support that assertion.

The Complaint alleges the following information about the parties. Plaintiff Süd Family Limited Partnership is a Wisconsin Limited Partnership authorized to transact business in Illinois with its principal place of business in Illinois; Plaintiff Süd's of Peoria, Inc. is an Illinois corporation; Plaintiff Süd's Motor Car Company is a North Carolina corporation authorized to transact business in Illinois; and Plaintiff Gian C. Süd is an individual citizen and resident of the State of Wisconsin. Defendant Regions Bank is an Alabama banking corporation and subsidiary of Regions Financial Corporation with its principal place of business in the state of Alabama; and Defendant DCR Mortgage VI Süb IV, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in the state of Florida.

While the Complaint alleges that Süd Family Limited Partnership (SFLP) is a Wisconsin Limited Partnership authorized to transact business in Illinois with its principal place of business in Illinois, the Complaint does not identify SFLP's partners nor the citizenship of those partners. Limited partnerships are citizens of every jurisdiction of which any partner is a citizen. Indiana Gas Company, Inc v Home Insurance Company, 141 F.3d 314, 316 (7th Cir 1998), citing Carden v Arkoma Associates, 494 U.S. 185 (1990). Therefore, the Complaint must identify SFLP's partners and the citizenship of each of those partners in order for the Court to determine whether diversity jurisdiction actually exists.

Next, a complaint must allege the state of incorporation and principal place of business for each of the named corporations, and those allegations must be based on the state of things at the time the action was brought. 28 USC § 1332(c)(1); Grupo Dataflux v Atlas Global Group, LP, 541 U.S. 567, 570-71 (2004). Here, the Plaintiffs' Complaint does not allege Süd's of Peoria, Inc.'s principal place of business, nor does it allege Süd's Motor Car Company's principal place of business.

Finally, citizenship for diversity purposes of a limited liability company is the citizenship of each of its members. Wise v Wachovia Securities, LLC, 450 F.3d 265, 267 (7th Cir 2006). Thus, the Court must know the identity of each member of Defendant DCR Mortgage VI Sub IV, LLC, as well as each member's citizenship. Hicklin Engineering, LC v Bartell, 439 F.3d 346, 348 (7th Cir 2006). If applicable, the Court must also know each member's members' citizenship. Id.

Accordingly, the Plaintiffs are directed to file an amended complaint that adequately alleges the factual basis for this Court's jurisdiction. The amended complaint shall be filed within 14 days of this date.


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.