EXPANDING ENTERPRISES, LLC v. CONTINENTAL WESTERN INSURANCE COMPANY

Case No. C17-0484JLR.

EXPANDING ENTERPRISES, LLC, Plaintiff, v. CONTINENTAL WESTERN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Insurance Contract
Nature of Suit: 110 Insurance
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Expanding Enterprises, LLC, Plaintiff, represented by Andrew R. Chisholm , MONTGOMERY PURDUE BLANKINSHIP & AUSTIN PLLC.

Continental Western Insurance Company, Defendant, represented by John Michael Silk , WILSON SMITH COCHRAN & DICKERSON & Lisa C. Neal , WILSON SMITH COCHRAN & DICKERSON.

Continental Western Insurance Company, Counter Claimant, represented by John Michael Silk , WILSON SMITH COCHRAN & DICKERSON & Lisa C. Neal , WILSON SMITH COCHRAN & DICKERSON.

Expanding Enterprises, LLC, Counter Defendant, represented by Andrew R. Chisholm , MONTGOMERY PURDUE BLANKINSHIP & AUSTIN PLLC.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.

The court has reviewed Defendant Continental Western Insurance Company's ("Continental") notice of removal (Not. (Dkt. #1)) and finds that Continental does not allege facts that demonstrate subject matter jurisdiction.

Continental asserts that the court's jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship. (Id. ¶ 4.) For purposes of assessing diversity, the court must consider the domicile of all members of a limited liability company. Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006) ("[A]n LLC is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens."); see also Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 101(e) ("In a case removed from state court . . . based on diversity, the notice of removal must also, to the extent possible, identify the citizenship of the parties, and, if any of the parties is a limited liability corporation (LLC), a limited liability partnership (LLP), or a partnership, identify the citizenship of the owners/partners/members of those entities to establish the court's jurisdiction."). Continental alleges that it is an Iowa domiciliary (Not. ¶ 3) and that Plaintiff Expanding Enterprises, LLC, is a "Washington limited liability company" (id. ¶ 4). However, Continental does not allege the domicile of Expanding Enterprises's members. (See generally id.; see also Silk Decl. (Dkt. # 2) ¶ 6.) Accordingly, the court cannot conclude that it has subject matter jurisdiction over this action.

The court ORDERS Continental to SHOW CAUSE within ten (10) days of the entry of this order why the case should not be remanded for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Continental's response may not exceed three (3) pages. Expanding Enterprises may, but is not required to, file a response subject to the same deadline and page limit. If Continental fails to timely and adequately comply with this order, the court will remand the case to King County Superior Court.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases