DIAMONDHEAD BEACH RESORT, LLC
v.
SAFETY SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
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 the plaintiff's amended complaint still failed to establish complete diversity jurisdiction, warranting dismissal.
Plaintiff Diamondhead Beach Resort, LLC, filed an amended complaint after a prior dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction due to deficient a…
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 Llcs cases and more on FLexlaw
COMPANY, and CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD’S LONDON,
Defendants. /
ORDER1
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 4). After Plaintiff filed its initial pleading, the Court dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. (Doc. 3). Specifically, Plaintiff did not show complete diversity because it made deficient allegations on its citizenship along with one Defendant’s (Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London). In dismissing, the Court explained how Plaintiff could fix the jurisdictional defects. Most obvious, Plaintiff—an LLC—needed to identify its members and their
Despite this, Plaintiff filed the Amended Complaint—which still fails to show complete diversity. Again, Plaintiff made no effort to demonstrate its own citizenship. It calls itself “a Florida limited liability company with its principal place of business in Lee County, Florida,” without identifying any members. (Doc. 4 at 1). As the Court already said, “A ‘party must list the citizenships of all the members of the’ LLC.” (Doc. 3 at 2) (quoting Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings L.L.C., 374 F. 3d 1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004)). This is unexceptional, black-letter law.
What’s more, Plaintiff made no effort to correct the defects and properly identify Lloyd’s domicile. The Court told Plaintiff Lloyd’s isn’t a corporation and pointed to binding precedent saying so. (Doc. 3 at 3) (quoting Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London v. Osting-Schwinn, 613 F. 3d 1079, 1088 (11th Cir. 2010)).
Nevertheless, the Complaint alleges Lloyd’s is “a corporation with its principal place of business in the United Kingdom.” (Doc. 4 at 2). Perhaps the Court could forgive the statement if Plaintiff specified the relevant Lloyd’s subscribers (as directed). But like above, Plaintiff did not try to identify the subscribers. Because Plaintiff again failed to plead complete diversity, the Court must dismiss. The Court, however, will not afford another opportunity to amend. Plaintiff—who is represented by counsel—had a two-week chance to identify the parties’ citizenship. Instead of taking that opportunity, Plaintiff refiled the deficient allegations a day after the Court’s Order. So the Court will enter judgment and close the case. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject- matter jurisdiction. 2. The Clerk 1s DIRECTED to enter judgment, deny any pending motions as moot, terminate all deadlines, and close the case. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on September 26, 2022.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings L.L.C., 374 F.3d 1020 (11th Cir. 2004)
- Underwriters AT Lloyd's v. Osting-Schwinn, 613 F.3d 1079 (11th Cir. 2010)