Serett Metalworks v. Nicholson Corporation et al.
| Serett Metalworks |
| NICHOLSON CORPORATION, John and Jane Does 1-10 and Business Entities A-J |
| 1:2023cv03708 |
| May 18, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Sanket J Bulsara |
| LaShann DeArcy Hall |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 10, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Nicholson Corporation (Pittinsky, Laurence) |
ORDER: Defendant Nicholson Corporation is reminded to file the required Rule 7.1 disclosure statement by no later than 7/12/2023. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 requires parties in a diversity case to file a disclosure statement identifying the citizenship of every individual associated with a party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(a)(2) ("In an action in which jurisdiction is based on diversity under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a), a party or intervenor must, unless the court orders otherwise, file a disclosure statement. The statement must name--and identify the citizenship of--every individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to that party or intervenor: when the action is filed in or removed to federal court[.]"). The disclosure statement must be filed with the party's "first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court." Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(b)(1). Failure to file the required disclosure statement by 7/12/2023 may lead to sanctions, including entry of default, or other appropriate remedies. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara on 7/5/2023. (IS)
|
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Laurence D. Pittinsky on behalf of Nicholson Corporation (aty to be noticed) (Pittinsky, Laurence) |
| Filing 11 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE Executed Nicholson Corporation Acknowledgement filed by Nicholson Corporation. (Pittinsky, Laurence) |
| Filing 10 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Business Entities A-J, John and Jane Does 1-10, Nicholson Corporation, filed by Serett Metalworks. (Lurie, Joshua) |
|
ORDER: In light of Plaintiff's letter dated May 30, 2023 #7 , Plaintiff shall file an Amended Complaint reflecting the change to Paragraph 3 by no later than 6/7/2023. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara on 5/31/2023. (IS)
|
| Filing 9 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Serett Metalworks (Lurie, Joshua) |
| Filing 8 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Serett Metalworks (Lurie, Joshua) |
| Filing 7 Letter in response to the Courts Order to Show Cause by Serett Metalworks (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A - State of New Jersey Business Status Report) (Lurie, Joshua) |
|
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Plaintiff initiated this action in federal court on May 18, 2023, alleging this Court has diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332. (Compl., Dkt. No. 1 para. 5). "The party seeking to invoke jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332 bears the burden of demonstrating that the grounds for diversity exist and that diversity is complete." Advani Enters., Inc. v. Underwriters at Lloyds, 140 F.3d 157, 160 (2d Cir. 1998). Section 1332(a) requires complete diversity among the plaintiffs and defendants for a federal court to exercise diversity jurisdiction. Herrick Co. v. SCS Comm'ns, Inc., 251 F.3d 315, 322 (2d Cir. 2001) ("[D]iversity jurisdiction is available only when all adverse parties to a litigation are completely diverse in their citizenships."). "For diversity purposes, a corporation is considered a citizen of the state in which it is incorporated and the state of its principal place of business." Bayerische Landesbank, N.Y. Branch v. Aladdin Cap. Mgmt. LLC, 692 F.3d 42, 48 (2d Cir. 2012); see also 28 U.S.C. 1332(c)(1). And "[f]or purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a party's citizenship depends on [her] domicile." Linardos v. Fortuna, 157 F.3d 945, 948 (2d Cir. 1998). "[T]he domicile of a party to a diversity of citizenship case is the place where that individual has a true, fixed home and principal establishment, and to which, whenever that person is absent from the jurisdiction, he or she has the intention of returning[.]" 13E Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure 3612 (3d ed. 2021); Palazzo ex rel. Delmage v. Corio, 232 F.3d 38, 42 (2d Cir. 2000). Plaintiff alleges diversity exists because Plaintiff is a New York corporation with its principal place of business in New York and Defendant Nicholson Corporation is a New Jersey corporation. (Compl. paras. 1-2). This is not sufficient to infer that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. For one thing, the Complaint fails to disclose Nicholson Corporation's principal place of business. But in addition, Plaintiff alleges in another paragraph that venue is appropriate in this District because "this district is Defendants' principal address," thereby suggesting Nicholson Corporation's principal place of business is in New York. (Id. para. 6). As a result, the Court is unable to conclude whether it possesses diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332(a). Separately, Plaintiff has failed to file its Rule 7.1 disclosure statement. The newly amended Rule 7.1, which became effective on December 1, 2022, provides: "In an action in which jurisdiction is based on diversity under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a), a party or intervenor must, unless the court orders otherwise, file a disclosure statement. The statement must name--and identify the citizenship of--every individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to that party or intervenor: when the action is filed in or removed to federal court[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(a)(2). Plaintiff is directed to show cause why this action should not be dismissed, and file a compliant Rule 7.1 statement, by 6/9/2023. Failure to respond to this Order will result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara on 5/26/2023. (IS)
|
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Nicholson Corporation. (TPL) |
| Filing 5 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (TPL) |
| Filing 4 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (TPL) |
| Filing 3 Civil Cover Sheet.. Re Notice: Re: Incomplete Civil Cover Sheet, by Serett Metalworks (Lurie, Joshua) |
| Filing 2 Proposed Summons. Re #1 Complaint, by Serett Metalworks (Lurie, Joshua) |
| Case Assigned to Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall and Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (TPL) |
| NOTICE: The Clerk's Office cannot assign this case without a completed Civil Cover Sheet. Counsel is directed to forward a completed (2 Page Form) Civil Cover Sheet, answering all questions. This event can be found under the event Other Documents - Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet. (TPL) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against NICHOLSON CORPORATION, John and Jane Does 1-10, Business Entities A-J filing fee $ 402, receipt number ANYEDC-16712265 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -No,, filed by Serett Metalworks. (Lurie, Joshua) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
