Mehta v. Keaveney

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that an LLC was a citizen of Massachusetts for diversity purposes \because its sole member [was] a natural person who [was] a resident of Massachusetts\
• stating that in order to exercise diversity jurisdiction, “diversity must be complete; that is, no plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any defendant”
• “Under [28 U.S.C. §1332] . . . diversity must be complete; that is, no plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any defendant.”
• “Under [28 U.S.C. § 1332], . . . diversity must be complete; that is, no plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any defendant.”
• “Under [28 U.S.C. § 1332], . . . diversity must be complete; that is, no plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any defendant.”
• limited liability company’s citizenship is determined by the citizenship of each of its members

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).