Opinion
No. 01 C 9759
July 15, 2002
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case does not reflect well on anyone (except perhaps the plaintiffs themselves), including the court. The insurance carrier's processing of the claims was lamentable; plaintiffs' counsel brought suit in the wrong court; the insurance carrier's counsel failed to defend; and this court, overlooking obvious jurisdictional infirmities, granted a default judgment. That has resulted in yet more legal effort, which takes the parties back to square one. These claims should have been resolved two years ago by the parties, and we have urged them to do so now, apparently to no avail. Unfortunately, we cannot bring this matter to end because we lack subject matter jurisdiction and thus we have no authority to do anything other than dismiss the complaint without prejudice.
We assume that Veronica and Larry Kirk are citizens of Wisconsin, although the allegation is that they reside there. We assume Carla Foster is a citizen of Illinois, although the allegation is that she resides there. The citizenship of the defendant is unclear. A corporation is a citizen of the state of incorporation, which is not alleged, and of the state in which it has its principal place of business, which is also not alleged. Plaintiffs do allege that defendant is licensed to do business in both Illinois and Wisconsin, but that does not establish citizenship, although it means venue is proper in either state. For all we know, defendant could be incorporated and have its principal place of business other than in Illinois and Wisconsin. Thus there could be diversity, but it does not appear, as it must, from the face of the complaint.
If that were the only defect, we would vacate the default judgment and dismiss with leave to amend if complete diversity could be alleged. But, as we earlier noted, each of the plaintiffs had only soft tissue injuries of limited duration. For diversity jurisdiction each plaintiff's claim must exceed the $75,000 jurisdictional amount. Each plaintiff so claims, but that does not establish jurisdiction if it is clear that no reasonable trier of fact could award damages exceeding that amount to a plaintiff seeking recovery. As the amounts previously awarded indicate, none of the claims could reach that amount. Accordingly, we must vacate the judgment and dismiss the complaint without prejudice. We do so reluctantly because these claims should have been processed and paid a long time ago. This lawsuit would, if nothing else, appear to provide the defendant with all the information necessary to do just that, and we urge the parties cooperatively to resolve the matter without further litigation.