Diversity of Citizenship questions: can "evidence" of citizenship be printed off the internet and filed into the case, or does it need to be notarized or from the Secy of State?Also, per 28 USC 1332 (c)(1), a Corporation is deemed to be a citizen of the state in which it is incorporated. If incorporated in Washington, DC - which is not a state - then has 28 USC 1332 (c) (1) been met?The defendant is claiming diversity due to being incorporated in D.C., and using 1332 as it's reasoning. It is also using a printout without any affidavit.Can this "evidence" be challenged due to lack of authentication (FRCP 902) or that DC is not a state?
Country relating to Question: United States
State (if USA): Nevada
Hi,My name is XXXXX XXXXX X'd be happy to answer your questions today.If you're talking about corporate documents, those need to be authenticated. A person can request certified copies from the Secretary of State, which may be admitted into evidence. If there is no affidavit attached to the documents, and they're not certified, that may be a basis for disputing diversity of citizenship. Just be aware that the other party may simply get the correct evidence and submit it.If you look at 28 U.S.C., Section 1332(e), it specifically states that the definition of "state" includes the District of Columbia, so that unfortunately wouldn't be a basis for disputing the Federal Court's jurisdiction.
Follow up - the court ordered the defendant to file proof of citizenship. What they filed this time is pretty much exactly what they filed the first time which prompted the judge to order them to file proof. Should the plaintiff file for Summary Judgment or some other filing since they failed to provide proof after the judge ordered them to?
From what you said, it sounds like you're currently in the middle of a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. If that's true, there's no reason to file a Motion for Summary Judgment - the judge still has to rule on the Motion to Dismiss. The fact that the plaintiff failed to produce the required evidence is something that can be discussed at the hearing. Alternatively, you could file a Motion for Sanctions, asking that the plaintiff be prohibited from arguing diversity at the hearing, based on the fact that he ignored the judge's order to produce evidence. If he's representing himself, the judge usually gives him a little leeway.Then again, the law states that a corporation may not represent itself in court (unless the person appearing is a lawyer). So, if the plaintiff is representing the corporation, you can also file a Motion to Strike all of the pleadings that he has filed as not properly filed by a lawyer.I don't believe that a Motion for Summary Judgment is appropriate at this stage, but if I misunderstood where you are in the process, please let me know. That can make a difference.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).