From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pro Music Rights, Inc. v. Goldman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Feb 5, 2021
Case No: 2:21-cv-92-SPC-MRM (M.D. Fla. Feb. 5, 2021)

Opinion

Case No: 2:21-cv-92-SPC-MRM

02-05-2021

PRO MUSIC RIGHTS, INC and JAKE P NOCH, Plaintiffs, v. MILES A GOLDMAN, Defendant.


OPINION AND ORDER

Disclaimer: Documents hyperlinked to CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By using hyperlinks, the Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide, nor does it have any agreements with them. The Court is also not responsible for a hyperlink's availability and functionality, and a failed hyperlink does not affect this Order. --------

Before the Court is a sua sponte review of the file. Plaintiffs Pro Music Rights, Inc. and Jake P. Noch bring this diversity action against Goldman. Since Plaintiffs are proceeding in federal court, they must show the parties are completely diverse with an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 552 (2005). And district courts are "obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it may be lacking." Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 410 (11th Cir. 1999).

The Complaint only alleges Goldman is "believed" a "resident" of Georgia and that Noch is a "resident" of Florida. (Doc. 1 at 4). "Citizenship, not residence, is the key fact that must be alleged in the complaint to establish diversity for a natural person." Taylor v. Appleton, 30 F.3d 1365, 1367 (11th Cir. 1994). A party's residence in a state—without more—is not enough to show citizenship. E.g., Travaglio v. Am. Express Co., 735 F.3d 1266, 1269 (11th Cir. 2013). Rather, "[c]itizenship is equivalent to domicile for purposes of diversity jurisdiction." Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The Complaint, therefore, fails to correctly plead the citizenship of both Goldman and Noch. Because the Court cannot conclude it has jurisdiction, the Court dismisses the complaint without prejudice. Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint that adequately pleads subject-matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1653.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.

2. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint consistent with this Order on or before February 19, 2021. The failure to file a timely amended complaint will result in the case being closed without further notice.

DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on February 5, 2021.

/s/ _________

SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies: All Parties of Record


Summaries of

Pro Music Rights, Inc. v. Goldman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Feb 5, 2021
Case No: 2:21-cv-92-SPC-MRM (M.D. Fla. Feb. 5, 2021)
Case details for

Pro Music Rights, Inc. v. Goldman

Case Details

Full title:PRO MUSIC RIGHTS, INC and JAKE P NOCH, Plaintiffs, v. MILES A GOLDMAN…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

Date published: Feb 5, 2021

Citations

Case No: 2:21-cv-92-SPC-MRM (M.D. Fla. Feb. 5, 2021)