Dantin v. Southern Home Care Service, Inc., 3:16-cv-00692

Plaintiff Karen Dantin (on behalf of herself and her son Christopher Templeton) filed suit in state court alleging abuse/neglect and sought to substitute Normal Life of Lafayette, Inc. as a defendant in place of Southern Home Care Service, Inc.
Defendant Southern Home Care Service, Inc. removed the case to federal court asserting diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
Plaintiff’s proposed Second Supplemental and Amended Petition attempted to add Normal Life and continued to name Southern Home Care Service, Inc., but did not adequately allege corporate citizenship.
The proposed pleading identified Normal Life’s domicile and principal office address but failed to state its place of incorporation; it likewise failed to properly allege Southern Home Care Service, Inc.’s citizenship.
The Court found the allegations insufficient to establish diversity jurisdiction and to permit the 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e) analysis for post-removal joinder of defendants.
The magistrate judge ordered Plaintiff to file, within seven days, a comprehensive amended complaint that fully and correctly pleads the citizenship of all parties; that pleading will become the operative complaint.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the amended pleading adequately alleges the parties' citizenship for diversity jurisdiction	Dantin attempted to allege domicile/principal office addresses and substitute Normal Life for Southern Home Care	Southern Home Care (by removal) relies on the need for clear corporate citizenship facts to sustain federal jurisdiction	Court held the pleadings do not adequately allege corporate citizenship and directed Plaintiff to file a comprehensive amended complaint alleging state of incorporation and principal place of business
Whether post-removal joinder/substitution of a defendant can proceed without proper jurisdictional allegations	Dantin sought to add Normal Life as a defendant after removal (implicit: she seeks leave to amend)	Removal raises the burden to clearly establish diversity; joinder after removal requires proper citizenship facts to evaluate § 1447(e)	Court required adequate citizenship allegations before addressing joinder questions under § 1447(e)

Getty Oil, Div. of Texaco v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 841 F.2d 1254 (5th Cir.) (corporate citizenship requires state of incorporation and principal place of business)
Mas v. Perry, 489 F.2d 1396 (5th Cir.) (for diversity, citizenship means domicile; residence alone is insufficient)