Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

Josh Smalling Roofing & Restoration Co. v. Honeycomb Prods.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
Mar 23, 2020

James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana

ORDER

Defendant Sentry Insurance removed this case to this Court, alleging that this Court has diversity jurisdiction over this matter. Dkt. 1. For the Court to have diversity jurisdiction, the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and the litigation must be between citizens of different states. 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332(a). Sentry alleges that it is a citizen of Wisconsin and that Plaintiff Josh Smalling Roofing and Restoration is a citizen of Indiana. Dkt. 1 at 3. Sentry also alleges that Defendant/Cross- Claimant Honeycomb Products should be realigned as a plaintiff because its interests are aligned with Josh Smalling Roofing rather than with Sentry. Id. at 3-7. However, Sentry does not allege Honeycomb's citizenship.

Counsel has an obligation to analyze subject-matter jurisdiction, Heinen v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 671 F.3d 669, 670 (7th Cir. 2012), and a federal court always has the responsibility to ensure it has jurisdiction. Hukic v. Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420, 427 (7th Cir. 2009). The Court's obligation includes knowing the details of the underlying jurisdictional allegations. See Evergreen Square of Cudahy v. Wis. Hous. and Econ. Dev. Auth., 776 F.3d 463, 465 (7th Cir. 2015) ("the parties' united front is irrelevant since the parties cannot confer subject-matter jurisdiction by agreement...and federal courts are obligated to inquire into the existence of jurisdiction sua sponte").

Therefore, the Court ORDERS all parties to file a joint statement by April 20, 2020, that (1) alleges the citizenship of all parties; (2) analyzes the proper alignment of each party, including the claims in the amended complaint and all counterclaims; and (3) analyzes the Court's subject-matter jurisdiction. If the parties cannot agree on a joint statement, they SHALL FILE separate statements by April 20, 2020 addressing the issues identified above and indicating whether they plan to file a motion to remand.

SO ORDERED.

Date: 3/23/2020

/s/_________

James Patrick Hanlon

United States District Judge

Southern District of Indiana Distribution: William David Beyers
BUCHANAN & BRUGGENSCHMIDT PC
bbeyers@bbinlaw.com Michael Robert Giordano
LEWIS WAGNER LLP
mgiordano@lewiswagner.com Charles Johnson
401 Ohio Street
Terre Haute, IN 47807 Eric C. McNamar
LEWIS WAGNER LLP
emcnamar@lewiswagner.com Terry R. Modesitt
MODESITT LAW FIRM, PC
terry@modesittlawfirm.com Joel Modesitt
FREY LAW FIRM AND MODESITT LAW FIRM, PC
joel@modesittlawfirm.com Jared R. Modesitt
MODESITT LAW FIRM
jared@modesittlawfirm.com John Carl Trimble
LEWIS WAGNER LLP
jtrimble@lewiswagner.com