Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Monica Helm v. Eastgate Associates - Diversity ...
Routine Enforcement Amended Final

Monica Helm v. Eastgate Associates - Diversity Jurisdiction Disclosure Order

Favicon for www.courtlistener.com US District Court WDLA Docket Feed
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana ordered plaintiff Monica Helm to file an amended Diversity Jurisdiction Disclosure Statement no later than April 9, 2026. The court found that Helm's original filing only stated she is 'an individual and resident of the State of Louisiana,' which is insufficient for diversity jurisdiction purposes, as domicile rather than residency determines citizenship. The court cited established Fifth Circuit precedent holding that residency alone does not satisfy the citizenship allegation requirement for federal diversity jurisdiction.

“Plaintiff must file, no later than April 9, 2026, an amended Diversity Jurisdiction Disclosure Statement that specifically alleges the state in which she is domiciled.”

Published by USDC WDLA on courtlistener.com . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

About this source

GovPing monitors US District Court WDLA Docket Feed for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 8 changes logged to date.

What changed

The court identified a deficiency in plaintiff Monica Helm's Diversity Jurisdiction Disclosure Statement filed under Docket 22. The original disclosure alleged only that she is 'an individual and resident of the State of Louisiana,' which the court found legally insufficient under Fifth Circuit precedent. The court granted leave to amend, requiring the plaintiff to file a corrected statement by April 9, 2026, specifically alleging her state of domicile rather than mere residency.\n\nParties appearing in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction should ensure their citizenship disclosures explicitly state domicile, not just residency. Federal courts routinely dismiss cases where diversity jurisdiction allegations are defective, and plaintiffs bear the burden of properly alleging citizenship for each named party.

What to do next

  1. Plaintiff must file, no later than April 9, 2026, an amended Diversity Jurisdiction Disclosure Statement that specifically alleges the state in which she is domiciled.

Archived snapshot

Apr 26, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

Jump To

Top Caption Trial Court Document The text of this document was obtained by analyzing a scanned document and may have typos.

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project
, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

April 2, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

Monica Helm v. Eastgate Associates et al

District Court, W.D. Louisiana

Trial Court Document

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION
MONICA HELM CIVIL ACTION NO. 25-cv-2036
VERSUS JUDGE S. MAURICE HICKS, JR.
EASTGATE ASSOCIATES ET AL MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff Monica Helm filed a Diversity Jurisdiction Disclosure Statement (Doc. 22)
and alleged that she is “an individual and resident of the State of Louisiana.” It is domicile
rather than mere residency that decides citizenship for diversity purposes, and “an
allegation of residency alone ‘does not satisfy the requirement of an allegation of
citizenship.’” Midcap Media Finance, LLC v. Pathway Data, Inc., 929 F.3d 310, 313 (Sth
Cir. 2019), quoting Strain v. Harrelson Rubber Co., 742 F.2d 888, 889 (Sth Cir. 1984). A
person may reside in multiple states simultaneously, but “[a]n individual who resides in
more than one State is regarded, for purposes of federal subject-matter (diversity)
jurisdiction, as a citizen of but one State.” Wachovia Bank v. Schmidt, 126 S. Ct. 941, 951 (2006). That is the state in which the person is domiciled. Id.; Acridge v. Evangelical
Lutheran Good Samaritan Soc., 334 F.3d 444, 451 (Sth Cir. 2003).
Plaintiff must file, no later than April 9, 2026, an amended Diversity Jurisdiction
Disclosure Statement that specifically alleges the state in which she is domiciled.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 2nd day of April, 2026.
Mark L. Hornsby

Named provisions

Diversity Jurisdiction Disclosure Statement

Get daily alerts for US District Court WDLA Docket Feed

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from USDC WDLA.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
USDC WDLA
Filed
April 2nd, 2026
Compliance deadline
April 9th, 2026 (17 days ago)
Instrument
Enforcement
Branch
Judicial
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Minor
Document ID
5:25-cv-02036
Docket
5:25-cv-02036

Who this affects

Applies to
Criminal defendants Courts
Industry sector
9211 Government & Public Administration
Activity scope
Civil procedure Jurisdiction
Geographic scope
US-LA US-LA

Taxonomy

Primary area
Judicial Administration
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Civil Rights

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when US District Court WDLA Docket Feed publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!