117 F.R.D. 557 (1987)

Plaintiff sued two corporations for his injuries caused by asbestos.  In his original complaint, Plaintiff did not plead either the place of incorporation or the principal place of business for the two defendant corporations.  The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to plead complete diversity and gave Plaintiff 10 days leave to amend.

Plaintiff filed an amended complaint which again failed to plead the place of incorporation and the principal place of business for the two corporations.

The issue facing the district court was whether it had subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity where the plaintiff failed to allege the place of incorporation or principal place of business of the corporate defendants.  The court held that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction

The court reasoned that a corporation has dual citizenship.  For diversity jurisdiction purposes, a corporation is a citizen of (i) the place of its incorporation and (ii) the place where it has it’s principal business.  Both of those places must be diverse from the place of plaintiff’s citizenship in order to establish diversity jurisdiction.

In this case, the plaintiff failed to plead sufficient information to establish subject matter jurisdiction and, accordingly, his amended complaint was dismissed.  Further, the court held that Plaintiff’s failure to amend complaint to establish complete diversity, after he was provided ample opportunity to do so, warranted dismissal of claim with prejudice.

Related entries