Americold Realty Trust v. ConAgra Foods, Inc.
United States Supreme Court
577 U.S. 378, 136 S. Ct. 1012, 194 L. Ed. 2d 71 (2016)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
A group of corporations that manufactured food products (collectively, the plaintiff corporations) (plaintiffs) stored products in an underground warehouse owned by Americold Realty Trust (Americold) (defendant). After a warehouse fire destroyed products owned by the plaintiff corporations, the plaintiff corporations filed a lawsuit against Americold in Kansas state court alleging violations of state contract law. The plaintiff corporations were citizens of Delaware, Nebraska, and Illinois. Americold, a real estate investment trust, was organized under Maryland law. Americold removed the case to federal district court on diversity-jurisdiction grounds. The district court ruled in favor of Americold. The plaintiff corporations appealed. The court of appeals held that the district court’s exercise of jurisdiction over the case was improper because diversity of citizenship did not exist between Americold and the plaintiff corporations. The court of appeals reasoned that the citizenship of Americold, a noncorporate legal entity, depended on the citizenship of its members—meaning, in this case, its shareholders. Because no evidence of the citizenship of its shareholders was presented, Americold had failed to show that diversity of citizenship existed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sotomayor, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.