Home › Case briefs › Civil Procedure

Randazzo v. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania · Civil Procedure

Civil ProcedureSubject Matter JurisdictionDiversity JurisdictionPleadingdiversity jurisdictionsubject matter jurisdictioncorporate citizenship28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)

Facts

The complaint incorporated a master long form complaint from asbestos litigation. The court previously identified that the pleading failed to allege the state of incorporation or principal place of business of Bevco Industries and failed to allege the principal place of business of C.E. Refractories, making complete diversity inadequately pleaded. In the amended complaint, plaintiff repeated the same allegations. As to C.E. Refractories, the complaint alleged only Delaware incorporation and a registered office in Philadelphia; as to Bevco Industries, it alleged that the corporation was organized to do business in Pennsylvania and domiciled in Pennsylvania.

Issue

Whether a complaint invoking diversity jurisdiction sufficiently pleads subject matter jurisdiction when it alleges only one aspect of a corporation's citizenship, or uses allegations such as registered office or domicile instead of expressly alleging both state of incorporation and principal place of business. Also, whether dismissal with prejudice is proper after plaintiff is given an opportunity to amend and resubmits the same deficient allegations.

Rule

Under Rule 8(a)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c), a plaintiff bears the burden of affirmatively and distinctly alleging the facts essential to federal jurisdiction. For a corporation, the pleading must allege both the state of incorporation and the principal place of business; alleging only one, or substituting terms such as registered office or domicile, is insufficient. If the defect is not corrected after amendment, the court must dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

🔒

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

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Nina Alvarez, a citizen of New Mexico, files suit in federal court in Denver against Summit Valve Systems, alleging only that the company is incorporated in Nevada. Her complaint says nothing about where Summit Valve Systems has its principal place of business.

Assuming Nina invokes diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, what is the best result?

Explanation. A plaintiff invoking diversity jurisdiction must affirmatively and distinctly plead the facts essential to jurisdiction. For a corporation, § 1332(c) gives dual citizenship: state of incorporation and principal place of business. Pleading only incorporation is insufficient, so the complaint must be dismissed unless corrected by amendment. (Derived from Randazzo v. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. (n.d.).)