Daniel A. Bernath v. The American Legion
704 F. App'x 917
11th Cir.2017Background
- Pro se plaintiff Daniel A. Bernath sued multiple defendants (including the Shipleys, The American Legion, and Extreme Seal Experience LLC) alleging harassment, property damage, and torts, invoking federal statutes (Anti‑Terrorism Act, RICO) and state law.
- Bernath amended his complaint in district court; the district court sua sponte dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice for lack of subject‑matter jurisdiction.
- Bernath sought jurisdiction under federal question jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1331) based on the Anti‑Terrorism Act (18 U.S.C. § 2333) and RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1964(c)), and alternatively asserted diversity jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1332).
- The district court denied jurisdictional discovery and did not grant leave to amend; dismissal was without prejudice, leaving Bernath free to refile if he can plead jurisdictional facts.
- On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit reviewed whether Bernath’s federal claims were substantial and whether complete diversity was plausibly alleged.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Bernath’s ATA (Anti‑Terrorism Act) claim raises a substantial federal question | ATA applies because defendants engaged in intimidation/coercion and foreign‑organization conduct causing damage | Defendants are not a foreign organization and did not commit terrorism‑type acts required by ATA | ATA claim is wholly insubstantial; no plausible ATA claim asserted; jurisdiction under §1331 lacking |
| Whether RICO claim plausibly alleges a pattern of racketeering | RICO applies because defendants engaged in predicate acts (invoking Patriot Act/Hobbs Act theories) forming a pattern | No plausible predicate acts or pattern of racketeering alleged against defendants | RICO claim not plausibly alleged; federal‑question jurisdiction fails |
| Whether diversity jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 | Bernath alleged parties’ residences and claimed diversity | Residence allegations insufficient; failed to allege citizenship of each member of the LLC; The American Legion not shown to be localized | Diversity jurisdiction not established; complete diversity not alleged |
| Whether district court abused discretion by denying jurisdictional discovery or amendment | Bernath sought jurisdictional discovery and another chance to amend | No jurisdictional facts in dispute; dismissal without prejudice permitted re‑filing | No abuse of discretion; denial of discovery and dismissal without prejudice affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- McGinnis v. Ingram Equip. Co., 918 F.2d 1491 (11th Cir. 1990) (standard for dismissing suit for lack of federal‑question jurisdiction when claim is patently without merit)
- Dime Coal Co. v. Combs, 796 F.2d 394 (11th Cir. 1986) (jurisdictional dismissal test cited)
- Int’l Cafe, S.A.L. v. Hard Rock Cafe Int’l (U.S.A.), Inc., 252 F.3d 1274 (11th Cir. 2001) (standard for when a federal claim is ‘‘wholly insubstantial’’)
- Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81 (2005) (requirement of complete diversity among plaintiffs and defendants)
- Travaglio v. Am. Exp. Co., 735 F.3d 1266 (11th Cir. 2013) (residence allegations are insufficient to plead citizenship)
- Purchasing Power, LLC v. Bluestem Brands, Inc., 851 F.3d 1218 (11th Cir. 2017) (LLC citizenship is the citizenship of each member)
- Loyola Fed. Sav. Bank v. Fickling, 58 F.3d 603 (11th Cir. 1995) (federally chartered corporation not a citizen of any state unless activities are sufficiently localized)
- Scarfo v. Ginsberg, 175 F.3d 957 (11th Cir. 1999) (when federal jurisdiction is lacking, district court must dismiss pendent state‑law claims)