From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mistura v. DaimlerChrysler Corporation

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Oct 27, 2005
Civil No. 05-73488 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 27, 2005)

Opinion

Civil No. 05-73488.

October 27, 2005


OPINION AND ORDER


Plaintiffs assert that this Court has diversity jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' three state law claims. Plaintiffs allege that they reside in Sterling Heights, Michigan and that Defendant DaimlerChrysler is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Michigan. (First Am. Compl. ¶¶ 1, 2.) Defendant DaimlerChrysler alleges its principal place of business is in Oakland County, Michigan. (Ans. ¶ 2.) "A corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business." 28 U.S.C. 1332(c)(1). It appears from the pleadings that Plaintiffs and Defendant DaimlerChrysler are citizens of Michigan, and thus complete diversity of citizenship is lacking. See Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., 125 S. Ct. 2611, 2617-18 (2005) (citing Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. 267 (1806). I DISMISS this case without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Mistura v. DaimlerChrysler Corporation

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Oct 27, 2005
Civil No. 05-73488 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 27, 2005)
Case details for

Mistura v. DaimlerChrysler Corporation

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL A. MISTURA and CAMILLE ARIOLI-MISTURA, Plaintiffs, v…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Oct 27, 2005

Citations

Civil No. 05-73488 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 27, 2005)