Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Riley v. PK Management, LLC

United States District Court, D. Kansas

June 26, 2018

LEORA RILEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
PK MANAGEMENT, LLC, Defendants.

          NOTICE AND ORDER TO DEFENDANT PK MANAGEMENT, LLC TO SHOW CAUSE

          Teresa J. James U.S. Magistrate Judge

         To Defendant PK Management, LLC

         On June 22, 2018, Defendant PK Management, LLC removed this case from the District Court of Wyandotte County, Kansas, asserting this court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.[1] The Notice of Removal fails to allege facts sufficient for the Court to determine whether diversity of citizenship exists, as § 1332 requires. PK Management, LLC alleges it is “a California limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, with its principal place of business located in the State of California. Defendant is therefore a citizen of the State of California for purposes of determining diversity jurisdiction.”[2]The Notice of Removal further states that Defendant Central Park Investors, LLC is “a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Ohio, with its principal place of business located in California; therefore, . . . [it] is a citizen of the states of Ohio and California for the purposes of determining diversity jurisdiction.”[3]

         The removed action also names as Defendants Aspen Companies Management LLC and Central Park Holdings, LLC. The Notice of Removal makes no mention of those entities.

         Last, PK Management, LLC alleges that plaintiff Leora Riley is a resident of Wyandotte County, Kansas and is therefore a citizen of the State of Kansas.[4] The Notice of Removal makes no allegations of residency or citizenship for Plaintiffs Carolyn Bell or Terri Ozburn.

         For diversity jurisdiction purposes, a person is a citizen of the state where he resides.[5]The citizenship of a business entity is determined by its organizational structure. If the business is a corporation, it is a citizen of the state where it is incorporated and the state where its principal place of business is located.[6] If the business is a limited liability company, its citizenship is determined by the citizenship of each member of the LLC.[7]

         Here, the Notice of Removal identifies each Defendant's organizational structure as limited liability companies. But PK Management, LLC never identifies the citizenship of any of the members of PK Management, LLC, Central Park Investors, LLC, Aspen Companies Management, LLC, or Central Park Holdings, LLC. The allegations thus fail to establish any Defendant's citizenship for diversity jurisdiction purposes. Moreover, the allegations also fail to establish Plaintiffs Carolyn Bell and Terri Ozburn's citizenship for diversity jurisdiction purposes.

         The Court has an independent obligation to satisfy itself that subject matter jurisdiction is proper, [8] and “must dismiss the cause at any stage of the proceedings in which it becomes apparent that jurisdiction is lacking.”[9]

         The Court cannot determine the citizenship of any party other than Leora Riley from the information PK Management, LLC has provided in the Notice of Removal. Consequently, the Court cannot conclude that Plaintiffs and Defendants are diverse for purposes of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court thus directs PK Management, LLC to show cause in writing on or before July 6, 2018 why the Court should not remand this case to state court because it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the action.

         IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that PK Management, LLC is required to show good cause in writing, on or before July 6, 2018, why the Court should not remand this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.

---------

Notes:

[1] ECF No. 1 at 3.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.