HomeCase briefs › Civil Procedure

Buchel-Ruegsegger v. Buchel

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009 · Civil Procedure
Civil ProcedureSubject-Matter JurisdictionDiversity JurisdictionAlienage Jurisdiction§ 1332(a)(2)§ 1332(a)(1)alienage jurisdictiondiversity jurisdiction

Facts

Georg Buchel transferred 200,000 Swiss francs to his son John, who lives in Wisconsin, two days before Georg died in Switzerland. Swiss courts later concluded that Georg's estate was entitled to 150,000 of those francs, but John refused to remit the money. Vreni Buchel-Ruegsegger, Georg's widow and the estate's personal representative, sued John in federal court asserting diversity jurisdiction and alleging that his refusal to comply with the Swiss determination constituted conversion under Wisconsin law. The parties stipulated that Vreni was a citizen of the United States and Switzerland, Georg was a citizen of the United States and Lichtenstein, and John was a citizen of the United States; Vreni lived in Switzerland when suit was filed.

Issue

Whether the federal district court had subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 over a suit by a dual citizen of the United States and a foreign country, living abroad, against a United States citizen. More specifically, the question was whether jurisdiction existed under either § 1332(a)(2) as alienage jurisdiction or § 1332(a)(1) as diversity jurisdiction.

Rule

A dual citizen of the United States and a foreign country cannot invoke alienage jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2) against a United States citizen, because only the person's American nationality is recognized for that provision. In addition, an American citizen domiciled abroad is not a citizen of any state for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) and therefore cannot invoke ordinary diversity jurisdiction under that subsection.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

  • The court's holding and reasoning
  • Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
  • 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Sign up free to see more →
Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
Maya Keller, who holds both United States and German citizenship, lives in Berlin. She files a breach-of-contract action in federal court in Illinois against Owen Price, a citizen of Illinois, invoking 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2).

Does the federal court have alienage jurisdiction under § 1332(a)(2)?

Explanation. Under the majority rule, a dual citizen of the United States and a foreign country cannot rely on foreign citizenship to invoke § 1332(a)(2). Only the person's American nationality is recognized, so this suit is treated as one between U.S. citizens rather than between a state citizen and a foreign citizen. Maya's residence in Berlin does not change that analysis. (Derived from Buchel-Ruegsegger v. Buchel (n.d.).)