Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_23-cv-08509/USCOURTS-azd-3_23-cv-08509-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Kent Christensen, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. 

Leann Renee Galliway, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-23-08509-PCT-JJT

ORDER 

At issue is Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 36, “Compl.”). Federal 

courts are limited in the types of cases they can hear. The two most common exercises of 

subject matter jurisdiction involve either a controversy between citizens of different states 

(diversity jurisdiction) or a question of federal law (federal question jurisdiction). See 

28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332. Here, Plaintiffs assert diversity jurisdiction, stating that “the 

amount in controversy, without interest and costs, exceeds the [statutory] sum or value.” 

(Compl. ¶ 2.1.) When assessing the amount in controversy for the purposes of diversity 

jurisdiction, the alleged damages must be taken from the face of the complaint. St. Paul 

Mercury Indem. Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 U.S. 283, 289 (1938). But Plaintiffs’ Complaint 

does not allege an amount of damages at all. Plaintiffs’ statement that the amount in 

controversy exceeds the statutory minimum is nothing more than a legal conclusion 

couched as a factual allegation, which the Court is not bound to accept as true. See Ashcroft 

v. Iqbal, 566 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Therefore, the Court will order Plaintiffs to show cause 

why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Case 3:23-cv-08509-KML Document 50 Filed 05/30/24 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs show cause in writing within seven 

days of the date of this Order why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject 

matter jurisdiction.

Dated this 30th day of May, 2024.

Honorable John J. Tuchi

United States District Judge

Case 3:23-cv-08509-KML Document 50 Filed 05/30/24 Page 2 of 2