FRS GC LLC v. OAK TREE MANAGEMENT LLC

No. CV-17-01189-PHX-JAT.

FRS GC LLC, Plaintiff, v. Oak Tree Management LLC, Milagro Consulting LLC, David Harbour, and Abby Harbour, Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Arizona.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Fraud
Nature of Suit: 370 Other Fraud
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

FRS GC LLC, Plaintiff, represented by Geoffrey S. Kercsmar , Kercsmar & Feltus PLLC.

FRS GC LLC, Plaintiff, represented by Sean James O'Hara , Kercsmar & Feltus PLLC.

Oak Tree Management LLC, Defendant, represented by Jamie Gill Santos , Thorpe Shwer PC & William Lee Thorpe , Thorpe Shwer PC.

Milagro Consulting LLC, Defendant, represented by Jamie Gill Santos , Thorpe Shwer PC & William Lee Thorpe , Thorpe Shwer PC.

David Harbour, Defendant, represented by Jamie Gill Santos , Thorpe Shwer PC & William Lee Thorpe , Thorpe Shwer PC.

Abby Harbour, Defendant, represented by Jamie Gill Santos , Thorpe Shwer PC.

Abby Harbour, a married couple, Defendant, represented by William Lee Thorpe , Thorpe Shwer PC.


ORDER

JAMES A. TEILBORG, Senior District Judge.

On June 1, 2017, this Court entered an order that ended with:

IT IS ORDERED that by June 9, 2017, Plaintiff shall file a supplement to the complaint listing the names and citizenship of every member of each limited liability company, or this case will be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

(Doc. 17).

On June 9, 2017, Plaintiff filed a supplement that says:

Plaintiff FRS GC LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. It has only one member: Princeton Alternative Income Fund, L.P., a limited partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. Princeton Alternative Income Fund, L.P.—and thus its subsidiary plaintiff FRS GC LLC—are citizens of: Delaware, California, New Jersey, New York, Illinois, Georgia, Maryland, Texas, and the British Virgin Islands.

(Doc. 20).

This supplement failed to fully comply with the Court's June 1, 2017 order. Specifically, it fail to identify each member of the limited partnership (which is the sole member of Plaintiff), what type of entity each partner is (if any), and on a partner by partner basis, allege citizenship of the partner.1 The Court will give Plaintiff one (and only one) further opportunity to allege jurisdiction. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that by June 14, 2017, Plaintiff shall file a second supplement to the complaint listing the names and citizenship of every partner of Plaintiff's sole member,2 or this case will be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

FootNotes


1. See Carden v. Arkoma Associates, 494 U.S. 185, 195-96 (1990) (holding that partnerships take on the citizenship of every general and limited partner).
2. In the first supplement, Plaintiff listed every member of the Defendant LLCs.

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