MELTON
v.
LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, LLC
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 complaint must be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to insufficient pleading of party citizenship.
Plaintiff sued defendants for products liability, citing diversity jurisdiction. The complaint failed to sufficiently plead the citizenship of the pla…
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 Limited Liability Company cases and more on FLexlaw
LOWE’S HOME CENTERS, LLC and WERNER CO.,
Defendants. /
ORDER1
Before the Court is Plaintiff Christopher Melton’s Complaint (Doc. 1). Melton sues Defendants for products liability stemming from his fall from a ladder. The Complaint cites diversity jurisdiction as the basis for the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. “[A] federal court is obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it may be lacking” and should do so “at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings.” Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F. 3d 405, 410 (11th Cir. 1999). A plaintiff who asserts diversity jurisdiction must prove that diversity jurisdiction exists. King v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 505
Residency is not enough. A person’s citizenship is determined by his “domicile,” or “the place of his true, fixed, and permanent home and principal establishment . . . to which he has the intention of returning whenever he is absent therefrom.” McCormick v. Aderholt, 293 F. 3d 1254, 1257-58 (11th Cir. 2002). Here, Melton’s domicile is not identified. Melton pleads that Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, is a foreign profit corporation with its principal place of business in North Carolina. (Doc. 1 at ¶ 4). But an LLC is a citizen of every state in which one of its members is domiciled. Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings L.L.C., 374 F. 3d 1020 (11th Cir. 2004). Each member of the LLC must be diverse from the opposing party. See Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 89 (2005). Here, the LLC members, and their citizenship, are not identified.
Melton pleads that Werner Co. is a foreign profit company with its principal place of business in Illinois. (Doc. 1 at ¶ 5). But a corporation is a citizen of any state by which it has been incorporated and has its principal place of business. Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 80 (2010). Here, Melton does not identify Werner’s state of incorporation. Because Melton has not pled the parties’ citizenship, the Court can only speculate as to whether it has jurisdiction. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: (1) The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (2) Plaintiff may file an amended complaint by November 4, 2021. Failure to do so will cause the Court to close this case without further notice. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on October 21, 2021.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- McCORMICK v. Aderholt, 293 F.3d 1254 (11th Cir. 2002)
- HERTZ Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77 (U.S. 2010)
- Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche et ux., 546 U.S. 81 (U.S. 2005)