Crumer v. Target Corporation

15 Citing cases

  1. Eckert/Wordell Architects, Inc. v. FJM Props. of Willmar, LLC

    Civ. No. 12-968 (RHK/JJG) (D. Minn. May. 15, 2012)

    rr Commc'ns, Inc. v. EMC Corp., Inc., No. 4:08-CV-87, 2008 WL 341664, at *2 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 5, 2008) ("A plaintiff who seeks to invoke diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts must plead citizenship distinctly and affirmatively.") (citation omitted). An allegation regarding a party's citizenship based "upon information and belief" will not suffice, e.g., America's Best Inns, Inc. v. Best Inns of Abilene, L.P., 980 F.2d 1072, 1074 (7th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (only a statement about jurisdiction "made on personal knowledge has any value"; one made "'to the best of my knowledge and belief' is insufficient" to invoke jurisdiction); Carroll v. Gen. Med. Co., 53 F.R.D. 349, 350 (D. Neb. 1971) (allegation of diversity upon information and belief was "clearly improper"), because such an averment is "not an affirmative allegation of facts on which the court m[ay] conclude that jurisdiction prevails," Gillespie v. Shoemaker, 191 F. Supp. 8, 10 (E.D. Ky. 1961) (emphasis added); accord, e.g., Crumer v. Target Corp., Civ. No. 07-836, 2007 WL 4373950, at *2 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007) (the required "distinctiveness and positiveness [of jurisdictional allegations] are lacking when . . . allegations of citizenship are couched in evasive language such as 'upon information and belief.' When made in that manner, said allegations do not constitute the affirmative pleading of fact on which the Court must conclude that jurisdiction prevails.") (quoting Baker v. Murphy, 495 F. Supp. 462, 465 (D.P.R. 1980)).

  2. Jones v. American Coal Co.

    CIVIL NO. 12-160-GPM (S.D. Ill. Feb. 24, 2012)

    To conclude, American must file an amended notice of removal in conformity with this Order not later than 12:00 noon on Monday, February 27, 2012. Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit, Saline County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). IT IS SO ORDERED.

  3. Loellke v. Moore

    CIVIL NO. 12-2-GPM (S.D. Ill. Jan. 10, 2012)

    Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). IT IS SO ORDERED.

  4. BROOKSIDE AGRA, LLC v. UNCLE TED ORGANICS, LTD.

    CIVIL NO. 11-863-GPM (S.D. Ill. Sep. 30, 2011)

    Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St. Clair County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); O'Neill v. Pointer, Civil No. 09-704-GPM, 2009 WL 3575267, at *1, *3 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 26, 2009); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). The Court can judicially notice the online records of corporations and LLCs maintained by the Illinois Secretary of State at http://www.ilsos.gov/corporatellc/index.jsp.

  5. DELTA COMMUNICATIONS, LLC v. MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERV.

    CIVIL NO. 10-980-GPM (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2010)

    To conclude, MCI must file an amended notice of removal in conformity with this Order not later than 12:00 noon on Friday, December 31, 2010. Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit, Saline County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). IT IS SO ORDERED.

  6. Kratz v. Pfizer, Inc.

    CIVIL NO. 10-691-GPM (S.D. Ill. Sep. 20, 2010)

    Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit, Saline County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); O'Neill v. Pointer, Civil No. 09-704-GPM, 2009 WL 3575267, at *1, *3 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 26, 2009); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). IT IS SO ORDERED.

  7. Rodriguez v. Pfizer, Inc.

    CIVIL NO. 10-650-GPM (S.D. Ill. Sep. 20, 2010)

    Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit, Williamson County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); O'Neill v. Pointer, Civil No. 09-704-GPM, 2009 WL 3575267, at *1, *3 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 26, 2009); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). IT IS SO ORDERED.

  8. Hunt v. Davita, Inc.

    CIVIL NO. 10-602-GPM (S.D. Ill. Aug. 13, 2010)   Cited 2 times

    To conclude, DaVita must file an amended notice of removal in conformity with this Order not later than 12:00 noon on Friday, August 20, 2010. Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, Franklin County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). IT IS SO ORDERED.

  9. French v. STL Distribution Services, LLC

    CIVIL NO. 10-511-GPM (S.D. Ill. Jul. 28, 2010)   Cited 1 times

    Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); O'Neill v. Pointer, Civil No. 09-704-GPM, 2009 WL 3575267, at *1, *3 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 26, 2009); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). IT IS SO ORDERED.

  10. Eyster v. Shade Tree Service Company

    CIVIL NO. 10-466-GPM (S.D. Ill. Jun. 29, 2010)   Cited 7 times

    To conclude, Shade Tree is ORDERED to file an amended notice of removal that alleges that Eyster is a citizen of Illinois, not a resident of Illinois, no later than 12:00 noon on Tuesday, July 6, 2010. Failure to file an amended notice of removal as herein ordered will result in remand of this case to the Circuit Court of the Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); O'Neill v. Pointer, Civil No. 09-704-GPM, 2009 WL 3575267, at *1, *3 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 26, 2009); Crumer v. Target Corp., Civil No. 07-836-GPM, 2007 WL 4373950, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2007); Pruitt v. Kelly Moore Paint Co., Civil No. 07-768-GPM, 2007 WL 4225823, at *1 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 28, 2007). As a final matter, the Court reminds Shade Tree that the jurisdictional facts contained in its amended notice of removal must be alleged not on the basis of "information and belief" but on personal knowledge.