Hindrichs v. United Repossessors, Inc., 3:12-cv-00804

Defendants removed the action on July 16, 2012, invoking diversity jurisdiction and naming Hindrichs as plaintiffs and TD Auto Finance, United Repossessors, LLC, and several John/Jane Does as defendants.
The removal allegedly asserted complete diversity but used residency rather than citizenship for individuals and failed to properly allege citizenship of LLC defendants.
Plaintiffs amended the complaint on August 9, 2012 to reveal the citizenship of relevant individuals, following defendants’ amended removal filed July 26, 2012.
Plaintiffs are Missouri citizens; TD Auto Finance, LLC has a single member, TD Bank, N.A., a Delaware citizen; thus TD Auto Finance is a Delaware citizen.
United Repossessors, LLC has two members—MRCT Holding Company, Inc. (Minnesota) and United Auto Delivery & Recovery, Inc. (Tennessee)—making United Repossessors a citizen of Minnesota and Tennessee.
Maerhanda Rolens and Scott Hopfinger are Illinois citizens; Phillip Wahby is a Missouri citizen; Hindrichs plaintiffs remain Missouri citizens; therefore complete diversity does not exist.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether complete diversity exists between the parties.	Hindrichs contend lack of complete diversity due to Missouri citizens on both sides.	Defendants argued amended removal established complete diversity among parties.	No complete diversity; action must be remanded.
Whether the case should be remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.	Plaintiffs assert remand due to non-diverse citizenship.	Defendants acknowledge potential lack of complete diversity but rely on earlier removals.	The court remands to state court for lack of jurisdiction.

Craig v. Ontario Corp., 543 F.3d 872 (7th Cir. 2008) (permissive raising of jurisdictional challenges; sua sponte remand when lack of jurisdiction)
Sadat v. Mertes, 615 F.2d 1176 (7th Cir. 1980) (practice of raising subject-matter jurisdiction at any stage)
Doe v. Allied-Signal, Inc., 985 F.2d 908 (7th Cir. 1993) (doubts about removal resolved in favor of remand)
Meyerson v. Harrah's East Chicago Casino, 299 F.3d 616 (7th Cir. 2002) (citizenship and domicile rules for individuals in diversity)
Dakuras v. Edwards, 312 F.3d 256 (7th Cir. 2002) (citizenship tracing for individuals in diversity cases)
Cosgrove v. Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729 (7th Cir. 1998) (LLCs treated as partnerships for diversity; member citizenships traced)
Hart v. Terminex Int'l, 336 F.3d 541 (7th Cir. 2003) (citizenship of unincorporated associations traced via members)
Hukic v. Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420 (7th Cir. 2009) (LLC citizenship determined by members' citizenship)
Wachovia Bank v. Schmidt, 546 U.S. 303 (Sup. Ct. 2006) (aggregation of LLC citizenship; place of formation irrelevant)
Howell v. Tribune Entm't Co., 106 F.3d 215 (7th Cir. 1997) (diversity principle in Seventh Circuit)