Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01981/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01981-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity Action

---

1

18cv1981-L(WVG)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SARAH STAGGS, as Personal 

Representative of the Estate of Jeffrey 

Hugh Staggs,

Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC 

ASSOCIATION,

Defendant.

Case No.: 18cv1981-L(WVG)

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND TO 

ALLEGE SUBJECT MATTER 

JURISDICTION

In this tort action for negligence and breach of contract, Plaintiff alleges federal 

jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. §1332. (Compl. at 2.) 

Because the complaint does not sufficiently allege the parties' citizenship, the action is 

dismissed with leave to amend.

Unlike state courts, 

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They possess only that 

power authorized by Constitution and statute, which is not to be expanded 

by judicial decree. It is to be presumed that a cause lies outside this limited 

jurisdiction, and the burden of establishing the contrary rests upon the party 

asserting jurisdiction.

Case 3:18-cv-01981-L-WVG Document 3 Filed 08/28/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

18cv1981-L(WVG)

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

Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994) (citations omitted). 

Federal courts are constitutionally required to raise issues related to federal subject matter 

jurisdiction and may do so sua sponte. Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 

(2006). A federal court must satisfy itself of its jurisdiction over the subject matter 

before proceeding to the merits of the case. Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 

574, 577, 583 (1999). 

"A plaintiff suing in a federal court must show in his pleading, affirmatively and 

distinctly, the existence of whatever is essential to federal jurisdiction, and, if he does not 

do so, the court, on having the defect called to its attention or on discovering the same, 

must dismiss the case, unless the defect be corrected by amendment.” Tosco Corp. v. 

Communities for a Better Env’t, 236 F.3d 495, 499 (9th Cir. 2001) (internal citations and

quotation marks omitted), abrogated on other grounds by Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 

U.S. 77, 82-83 (2010). Plaintiff relies on 28 U.S.C. §1332, which requires complete 

diversity of citizenship between plaintiffs and defendants. The complaint must 

affirmatively allege the state of citizenship of each party. Bautista v. Pan Am. World 

Airlines, Inc., 828 F.2d 546, 552 (9th Cir.1987); see also Kanter v. Warner-Lambert, Co., 

265 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2001). 

The complaint names Sarah Staggs, personal representative for the estate of Jeffrey 

Hugh Staggs as Plaintiff, and National Collegiate Athletic Association ("NCAA") as 

Defendant. For diversity purposes, "the legal representative of the estate of a decedent 

shall be deemed to be a citizen only of the same State as the decedent . . .." 28 U.S.C. §

1332(c)(2). Plaintiff alleged the decedent was a California citizen. (Compl. at 2.) 

Citizenship of an unincorporated entity such as NCAA is determined by the citizenship of 

all of its members. See Carden v. Arkoma Assoc., 494 U.S. 185, 195-96 (1990). Plaintiff 

alleges that the NCAA has a principal place of business in Indiana. (Compl. at 2.) This 

is insufficient to establish that the parties meet all the requirements of diversity 

jurisdiction. 

Case 3:18-cv-01981-L-WVG Document 3 Filed 08/28/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

18cv1981-L(WVG)

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

Because Plaintiff does not allege the facts necessary to establish diversity, the 

complaint is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff is granted leave to 

file an amended complaint to supplement the jurisdictional allegations. See 28 U.S.C. 

§1653. If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, she must do so no later than 

September 19, 2018. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 28, 2018

Case 3:18-cv-01981-L-WVG Document 3 Filed 08/28/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3