# Brown v. Pierce

> District Court, E.D. Louisiana · November 2, 2022

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10188537

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. Louisiana
- **Decided:** November 2, 2022
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10188537

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LATOYA BROWN CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS NO. 21-2384

ZOAN PIERCE, ET AL. SECTION “R” (3)
ORDER

On December 27, 2021, plaintiff Latoya Brown filed a complaint
against a dozen defendants. In the amount-in-controversy section of her
complaint, plaintiff wrote, “[p]hone hacked, can’t email or contact anyone

important,” and in the statement-of-claim section, she wrote, “car, phone.”1
These are the only descriptions she provided of the nature of her claims.
Plaintiff left blank the jurisdiction section of her complaint. In the section
entitled, “If the Basis for Jurisdiction is Diversity Citizenship,” plaintiff

indicted that she is a citizen of Louisiana.2 But in the list of parties to the
complaint, plaintiff indicated that at least half of the named defendants also
reside in Louisiana.3

1 R. Doc. 1 at 6.
2 Id. at 5.
3 Id. at 2-3.
On January 7, 2022, Magistrate Judge Dana Douglas issued a Rule to
Show Cause Order that directed plaintiff to provide a written statement of

her position concerning this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction by February
9, 2022.4 The order indicated that her “failure to respond in writing as
directed may result in the dismissal of the captioned complaint.”5 Plaintiff
did not respond to the order.

Thereafter, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending this Court dismiss plaintiff’s
complaint without prejudice because plaintiff “has not established diversity

nor federal question jurisdiction, and this Court lacks subject-matter
jurisdiction over her complaint.”6 Plaintiff did not object to the R&R.
In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error.
Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996); see

also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note (1983) (“When no timely
objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error
on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”). The
Court finds that there is no clear error.

4 R. Doc. 3 at 3-4.
5 Id. at 4.
6 R. Doc. 4 at 4.
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. MidCap Media
Finance, LLC v. Pathway Data, Inc., 929 F.3d 310, 313 (5th Cir. 2019).

There is nothing on the face of the complaint to indicate that plaintiff’s claim
arises under federal law. Accordingly, there appears to be no federal
question jurisdiction. The court also lacks diversity jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1332, as the complaint makes clear that there is not complete

diversity among the parties. Plaintiff identified herself as a citizen of
Louisiana, and although the complaint indicates that some defendants may
be citizens of other states, at least six of them appear to be citizens of

Louisiana. Plaintiff thus has not met her burden of establishing complete
diversity. Getty Oil Corp., Div. of Texaco, Inc. v. Ins. Co. of North Am., 841
F.2d 1254, 1258-59 (5th Cir. 1988) (“The burden of proving that complete
diversity exists rests upon the party who seeks to invoke the court’s diversity

jurisdiction.”).
District courts must “‘dismiss the action’ whenever ‘it appears by
suggestion of the parties or otherwise that the court lacks jurisdiction of the
subject matter.’” Avitts v. Amoco Prod. Co., 53 F.3d 690, 693 (5th Cir. 1995)

(quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3)). The R&R properly recommends that the
Court do so here. The Court hereby approves the R&R and adopts it as its

own opinion. Plaintiffs complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this__2nd__ day of November, 2022.
bern Varea
SARAH S. VANCE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10188537. Public record. Not legal advice.
