The Shack’s Showin’ Up in Harris County District Court with His Ten Dollars for the Obey Clan

ORDER

It is black letter law that “[f]ederal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, and absent jurisdiction conferred by statute, lack the power to adjudicate claims.” Stockman v. Fed. Election Comm’n, 138 F.3d 144, 151 (5th Cir. 1998).

“Federal courts, both trial and appellate, have a continuing obligation to examine the basis for their jurisdiction. The issue may be raised by parties, or by the court sua sponte, at any time.”

MCG, Inc. v. Great W. Energy Corp., 896 F.2d 170, 173 (5th Cir. 1990).

As every first-year law student quickly discovers, there are two main types of federal subject matter jurisdiction: federal question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction.

Under federal question jurisdiction, a district court can hear and decide any civil action “arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Diversity jurisdiction allows district courts to entertain cases between citizens of different states where the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1), (b).

This case is a dispute concerning the foreclosure of real property.

The Plaintiffs—Kipkano Obey, Shinda Obey, Tammu Obey, and Kimkeena Jordon (aka Kimkeen Obey) (collectively “Obeys”)—filed suit in Texas state court against Defendants SN Servicing Corporation (“SNSC”) and Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB (“WSFS”).

See Dkt. 1-3.

Defendants removed the action to federal district court, arguing that this “Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to []§ 1332(a)(1) because there is complete diversity of the Parties and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.”

Dkt. 1 at 2.

The Obeys’ Original Petition filed in Texas state court shows that they are each “residents of Harris County, Texas” (Dkt. 1-3 at 1), and thus Texas citizens for purposes of determining diversity of citizenship.

The Notice of Removal further alleges that SNSC “is an Alaska corporation” and that WSFS “is a wholly owned subsidiary of WSFS Financial Corp., a publicly held corporation.”

Id. at 3.

According to Defendants, because “Plaintiff[s are] citizen[s] of the State of Texas, and SN Servicing is a citizen of the State of Alaska and Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB is a citizen of the State of Delaware[,] this lawsuit is between citizens of different states and complete diversity exists among the parties.”

Id. at 3.

But the diversity statute requires “complete diversity” of citizenship, meaning that “a district court cannot exercise diversity jurisdiction if one of the plaintiffs shares the same state citizenship as one of the defendants.”

Whalen v. Carter, 954 F.2d 1087, 1094 (5th Cir. 1992).

A corporation is a citizen of the state in which it is incorporated and the state in which it has its principal place of business.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). Thus, to determine whether diversity jurisdiction is proper, I must determine both the states of incorporation and the principal places of business for SNSC and WSFS.

Yet, the Notice of Removal is silent as to the principal place of business of either SNSC or WSFS.

I must have this information to ensure that I possess jurisdiction to hear this case.

Accordingly, Defendants are ORDERED to file a letter indicating their principal places of business no later than 5pm on Friday, May 5, 2023.

SIGNED this 3rd day of May 2023.

ANDREW M. EDISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Houston)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:22-cv-04000

RECAP Actions

Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

DOCKET CONTROL ORDER. ETT: 1 – 2 days. Amended Pleadings due by 5/31/2023. Joinder of Parties due by 5/31/2023 Pltf Expert Witness List due by 6/2/2023. Pltf Expert Report due by 6/2/2023. Deft Expert Witness List due by 7/3/2023. Deft Expert Report due by 7/3/2023. Discovery due by 9/1/2023. Dispositive Motion Filing due by 9/1/2023. Non-Dispositive Motion Filing due by 10/20/2023. Joint Pretrial Order due by 10/20/2023. Docket Call set for 10/25/2023 at 03:00 PM in by video before Magistrate Judge Andrew M Edison(Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew M Edison) Parties notified.(agould, 3) (Entered: 02/10/2023)

NOTICE of Setting. Parties notified.

Status Conference set for 2/10/2023 at 10:30 AM by video before Magistrate Judge Andrew M Edison, filed.

(rcastro, 3) (Entered: 02/07/2023)

U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Houston)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:22-cv-04000

RECAP Actions

ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons.

Initial Conference set for 2/15/2023 at 09:00 AM in by video before Magistrate Judge Andrew M Edison

(Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified.(ckrus, 4) (Entered: 11/18/2022)

U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Houston)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:22-cv-04000

Create an Alert for This Case on RECAP