Humphrey v. Horton
Humphrey v. Horton
Trial Court Opinion
PELE ERUSILCALLY FILED pore: —_ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT |DATE FILED: { 2/70 □ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ceed □□□□□□□□□□ | eww ee ee □□ eR RP Pe eee eee eee HK MICHAEL HUMPHREY Plaintiffs, -against- 24-cy-9369 (LAK) RICKY D.HORTON, et ano., Defendants RR RR □□ ee eee ee ee RR KK
ORDER
LEWIS A. KAPLAN, District Judge. Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1332, The notice of g removal fails adequately to allege the existence of subject matter jurisdiction because, perhaps among other things, it fails adequately to allege: iy The citizenship of one or more natural persons. See, e.g., Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'n v. Edwards,
194 U.S. 377(1904); Leveraged Leasing Administration Corp.v. PacifiCorp Capital, Inc.,
87 F.3d 44(2d Cir. 1996). O The citizenship of one or more corporations. See
28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). The citizenship of one or more partnerships. See Carden v. Arkoma Assocs.,
494 U.S. 195(1990). (@ — The exact nature and citizenship of one or more alleged limited liability companies, See Handlesman v. Bedford Village Green Assocs. L.P.,
213 F.3d 48, 52(2d Cir. 2000). Absent the filing, on or before December 17, 2024 of an notice of removal adequately alleging the existence of subject matter jurisdiction, this action will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. Dated: December 10, 2024 /; Vy, Lewis A. Kapla United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown