Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Williamson v. Aramark Schools Facilities, LLC

United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana

September 13, 2017

ELLEN WILLIAMSON
v.
ARAMARK SCHOOLS FACILITIES, LLC ET AL.

          ORDER

          ERIN WILDER-DOOMES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Before the Court is East Baton Rouge Parish School Board's Motion to Substitute Complaint of Intervention (the “Motion”).[1] On July 7, 2017, East Baton Rouge Parish School Board (“EBRPSB”) filed a Motion for Leave to File Complaint of Intervention.[2] On September 5, 2017, the undersigned issued an Order[3] requiring EBRPSB to file a motion to substitute the proposed Complaint of Intervention[4] with a comprehensive complaint of intervention that adequately alleges the citizenship of all parties.[5]

         On September 12, 2017, EBRPSB filed the instant Motion with a proposed Complaint of Intervention that contains the following allegations regarding the citizenship of the parties:

1. The School Board is a political subdivision of the State of Louisiana and domiciled in Louisiana.
2. School Board seeks leave to intervene as a plaintiff in this matter.
3. Made defendants-in-intervention herein are as follows:
1. ELLEN WILLIAMSON, a person of the full age of majority and domiciled in Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana;
2. ARAMARKSCHOOLSFACILITIES, LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, a Delaware limited liability company, doing business in the State of Louisiana, having reinstated its corporate capacity on August 28, 2017, following revocation on March 15, 2017, and MetroClean is a “d/b/a” of Aramark Schools Facilities, LLC;
3. ARAMARK MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, is a limited partnership organized under the law of the state of Delaware, if [sic] which the general partner is Aramark SMMS LLC, a limited liability company organized under the laws of the state of Delaware with its principal place of business in Pennsylvania, and the sole limited partner is Aramark Services, Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Delaware with its principal place of business in Pennsylvania, and doing business in the State of Louisiana despite its failure to file its Annual Report in February of 2017 (and changing its principal business office address to “Delaware, PA” with no specific address on October 18, 2015).
4. ARAMARK SERVICES, INC., is a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Delaware with its principal place of business in Pennsylvania, with a principal business establishment address in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, and doing business in the State of Louisiana despite the entity's inactive status with the Louisiana Secretary of State since May of 2017 for failure to file its Annual Report.
5. SOJI SERVICES, INC. D/B/A METROCLEAN, a Texas corporation with its principal place of business in Texas; and
6. BRIDGET JONES, a person of full age of majority who is believed to be domiciled in the Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana.[6]

         Proper information regarding citizenship of all parties is necessary to determine whether EBRPSB's intervention will destroy the Court's subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. In the proposed Complaint of Intervention, citizenship has not been adequately alleged. While the citizenship of Ellen Williamson, Bridget Jones, Aramark Services, Inc. and Soji Services, Inc. d/b/a Metroclean has been adequately alleged, [7] citizenship has not been properly alleged with respect to Aramark Schools Facilities, LLC and Aramark Management Services, L.P.

         As stated in the September 5, 2017 Order, [8] with respect to Aramark Schools Facilities, LLC, the Fifth Circuit has held that for purposes of diversity, the citizenship of a limited liability company is determined by considering the citizenship of all its members. Harvey v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co., 542 F.3d 1077, 1080 (5th Cir. 2008). Thus, to properly allege the citizenship of a limited liability company, a party must identify each of the members of a limited liability company, and the citizenship of each member in accordance with the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) and (c). The same requirement applies to any member of a limited liability company which is also a limited liability company. See, Turner Bros. Crane and Rigging, LLC v. Kingboard Chemical Holding Ltd., 2007 WL 2848154, at *4 (M.D. La. Sept. 24, 2007) (“when partners or members are themselves entities or associations, the citizenship must be traced through however many layers of members or ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.