FT. MYERS TAV APTS, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND THE MARCUS ORGANIZATION, INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION,
v.
EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION; WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION; RSG SPECIALTY, LLC, A FOREIGN CORPORATION; RT SPECIALTY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION; AND RYAN SPECIALTY UNDERWRITING MANAGERS, A FOREIGN CORPORATION.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that plaintiffs' complaint must be dismissed without prejudice because it failed to properly allege diversity of citizenship, a prerequisite for federal subject matter jurisdiction.
[1] In a diversity action, a plaintiff must affirmatively and specifically allege the citizenship of each defendant; negative pleading that a defendant is organized under the…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Negative allegations of citizenship are insufficient. Plaintiffs must affirmatively and specifically allege the citizenship of the Defendants to demonstrate diversity.”
Court's explanation of the pleading standard for establishing diversity jurisdiction.
Plaintiffs filed a complaint invoking the court's diversity jurisdiction. The complaint alleged that the defendant insurance companies were foreign co…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Citizenship Of Parties cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is Plaintiffs Ft. Myers Tav Apts., LLC and The Marcus Organization Inc.'s complaint. (Doc. 1). For the below reasons, Plaintiffs' complaint is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Plaintiffs invoke the Court's diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). For diversity jurisdiction to exist, the plaintiff(s) and defendant(s)
must be citizens of different states, and the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and have “an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even in the absence of a challenge from any party." Arbaugh v. Y.H. Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006) (citation omitted); see also Kunce v. SPM of Ala., LLC, No. 6:25-CV-533-PGB-RMN, 2025 WL 974674, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 1, 2025) (noting that “[i]n a diversity action, the Court must ensure that the plaintiff alleges that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and that the citizenship of the parties is completely diverse.”).
Plaintiffs fail to properly allege diversity of citizenship. Plaintiffs' complaint alleges that Defendant Everest National Insurance Company “is a foreign insurance company, organized and existing under the laws of a state other than Florida, with its principal place of business outside Florida.” (Doc. 16). Almost identical language is used for each of the other four defendants, all of which are foreign corporations. (Id. ¶¶ 8, 15). That does not work.
Negative allegations of citizenship are insufficient. Plaintiffs must affirmatively and specifically allege the citizenship of the Defendants to demonstrate diversity. See Kalergis v. Home Depot USA, Inc., No. 6:24-CV- 743-JA-DCI, 2024 WL 1765586, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 24, 2024) ("[N]egative pleading of citizenship is inadequate to establish this Court's subject matter jurisdiction." (citation omitted)); see also Leech Tishman Fuscaldo & Lampl,
LLC v. Cart, No. 3:15-CV-311-J-39JBT, 2015 WL 13653043, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 27, 2015) (“Plaintiff cannot plead its citizenship in the negative."). Because Plaintiffs fail to affirmatively allege diversity of citizenship, they fail to establish this Court's subject matter jurisdiction.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. Plaintiffs' complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.
2. Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint on or before January 5, 2026. Failure to do so will cause the Court to close this case without further notice.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on December 22, 2025.
Sheri Polster Rappell
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (U.S. 2006)
- AMT Title Servs. of Tex., LLC v. TAG Agro, LLC (M.D. Fla. 2025)