From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Linder Enterprises v. Martinringle, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Oct 22, 2007
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:07-CV-1733-G (N.D. Tex. Oct. 22, 2007)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:07-CV-1733-G.

October 22, 2007


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


This court is required to examine the basis for its subject matter jurisdiction, on its own motion if necessary. Torres v. Southern Peru Copper Corp., 113 F.3d 540, 542 (5th Cir. 1997). Diversity of citizenship is alleged as the basis for subject matter jurisdiction in this case. Complaint ¶ 4. The plaintiff is alleged to be "a Minnesota company," id. ¶ 1, which might be a corporation or some other form of business entity. The defendant Martinringle, Inc. is alleged to be "a Texas corporation," id. ¶ 2, but its principal place of business is not alleged. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). The defendant Jenterra LLC ("Jenterra") is alleged, upon information and belief, to be "a Texas Limited Liability Company." Id. ¶ 3.

Generally, the citizenship of artificial entities other than corporations is determined by the citizenship of their members. See Carden v. Arkoma Associates, 494 U.S. 185 (1990). This rule applies to limited liability companies such as the defendant Jenterra. E.g., Wise v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, 450 F.3d 265, 267 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 127 S. Ct. 582 (2006); Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006); Pramco, LLC ex rel. CFSC Consortium, LLC v. San Juan Bay Marina, Inc., 435 F.3d 51, 54-55 (1st Cir. 2006). Accordingly, without knowing the type of entity that the plaintiff Linder Enterprises is, the principal place of business of the defendant Martinringle, Inc., and the citizenship of the members/owners of the defendant Jenterra, the court cannot determine the citizenship of all the parties and thus whether there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties.

Within ten days of this date, the plaintiff shall electronically file and serve an amended complaint alleging the type of business entity (e.g., corporation, sole proprietorship, partnership, etc.) the plaintiff Linder Enterprises is. If it is a corporation, its state of incorporation and principal place of business shall be alleged. If it is an entity other than a corporation, the names and citizenship of all its members and/or owners shall be alleged. In addition, the principal place of business of the defendant Martinringle, Inc. shall be alleged, as well as the names and citizenship of all the members/owners of the defendant Jenterra. Failure to timely file and serve such an amended complaint will result in dismissal of this case, without further notice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Linder Enterprises v. Martinringle, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Oct 22, 2007
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:07-CV-1733-G (N.D. Tex. Oct. 22, 2007)
Case details for

Linder Enterprises v. Martinringle, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:LINDER ENTERPRISES, Plaintiff, v. MARTINRINGLE, INC., and JENTERRA, LLC…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division

Date published: Oct 22, 2007

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:07-CV-1733-G (N.D. Tex. Oct. 22, 2007)

Citing Cases

Thompson v. Dr. Miracle's, Inc.

A business entity cannot be both a corporation and sole proprietorship; therefore the court seeks to clarify…

Thomas v. Dr. Miracle's, Inc.

A business entity cannot be both a corporation and sole proprietorship; therefore the court seeks to clarify…