Opinion
1:22-cv-08328 (JLR)
10-05-2022
BMO HARRIS BANK N.A., Plaintiff, v. RADIUM2 CAPITAL, LLC, Defendant.
ORDER
JENNIFER L. ROCHON, United States District Judge:
Plaintiff commenced this action on September 29, 2022. ECF No. 1 (“Complaint”). Plaintiff asserts that jurisdiction in this Court is proper by reason of diversity of citizenship, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Id. ¶ 13. Plaintiff alleges that Plaintiff is a national bank with its principal place of business in Illinois. Id. ¶ 8. Defendant is a limited liability company (“LLC”). Id. ¶ 9. Plaintiff alleges that Troy Caruso, an individual residing in New York, owns more than 95% of the membership interests in Defendant and that “the remaining members of [Defendant] are not residents or citizens of the State of Illinois.” Id. ¶¶ 10-12.
For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, “a national bank is a citizen only of the state listed in its articles of association as its main office.” OneWest Bank, N.A. v. Melina, 827 F.3d 214, 219 (2d Cir. 2016). An LLC is deemed to be a citizen of each state of which its members are citizens. See Handelsman v. Bedford Vill. Assocs. L.P., 213 F.3d 48, 51-52 (2d Cir. 2000). The citizenship of each member of an LLC must be affirmatively alleged, even where one member holds a majority interest in the LLC or it is alleged that members of the LLC are not citizens of a non-diverse state. See Tutor Perini Bldg. Corp. v. N.Y.C. Reg'l Ctr., LLC, No. 20-cv-00731 (PAE), 2020 WL 7711629, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 2020). “An individual's citizenship, within the meaning of the diversity statute, is determined by his domicile. . . [in other words] the place where a person has his true fixed home and principal establishment, and to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning.” Van Buskirk v. United Grp. of Cos., 935 F.3d 49, 53 (2d Cir. 2019). In the present case, Plaintiff fails to properly allege the citizenship of either party.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, on or before October 15, 2022, Plaintiff shall file on ECF a letter, supported by one or more sworn affidavits, alleging the citizenship of each party. If, by that date, Plaintiff is unable to allege a good-faith basis for complete diversity of citizenship, the action may be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, without further notice to the parties. Plaintiff is directed to, within two business days of this Order, serve on Defendant a copy of this Order and file proof of such service on the docket. Dated: October 5, 2022
SO ORDERED.