Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

16-132 - LIMEBERRY v. KROGER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP I


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
16-132 - LIMEBERRY v. KROGER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP I
July 18, 2016
PDF | More
ENTRY ON JURISDICTION - On July 8, 2016, Defendant, Kroger Limited Partnership I, filed a notice of removal which fails to allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The notice of removal alleges federal jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. However, the notice of removal fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of the parties. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional purposes. To begin, the notice of removal neither sufficiently identifies the members of Kroger Limited Partnership I nor adequately alleges their citizenship. In addition, the Defendants alleged the Plaintiff's citizenship "on information and belief." (Id.) However, allegations made upon information and belief are not sufficient to allow the Court to determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists. To remedy these deficiencies, the Defendant must file a supplemental jurisdictional statement to sufficiently establish this Court's jurisdiction over this case. The Defendant's statement must accurately identify the members of Kroger Limited Partnership I and articulate its citizenship. In addition, the Defendant must remedy the basis for its jurisdictional allegations. The Defendant's supplemental jurisdictional statement is due fourteen (14) days after the date of this entry. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 7/18/2016. (MAG)