Skip to main content

Whose citizenship counts for trusts

Americold Realty Trust v. ConAgra Foods

Updated Oct 18, 2026

In brief

The Supreme Court left the appeals court’s ruling in place: Americold’s shareholders count in determining its citizenship for diversity jurisdiction.

Where it stands
Decided

Decided 8-0 · March 7, 2016 · Opinion by Justice Sotomayor

What it’s about
Food distributors including ConAgra sued Americold over a contract dispute tied to a warehouse fire; Americold sought to move the case to federal court based on its trustees’ citizenship.
Who it affects
Americold’s shareholders, not just its trustees, count when determining its citizenship for diversity jurisdiction.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

Illustration for Americold Realty Trust v. ConAgra Foods, Inc.
Conceptual illustration · AI-generated

What it's about

The Supreme Court agreed with the appeals court (affirmed) that an unincorporated trust’s citizenship for diversity jurisdiction depends on all its members, including shareholder-beneficiaries.

Food distributors, including ConAgra, sued Americold over a contract dispute tied to a warehouse fire. Americold sought to move the case to federal court based on its trustees’ citizenship.

The dispute turned on whether a trust’s citizenship depends only on its trustees or also on its shareholder-beneficiaries.

Question presented

Is the citizenship of a trust for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction based on the diversity of the trust’s beneficiaries (who are its shareholders) as well as the trustees?

What the Court decided

Holding

For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, Americold’s citizenship is based on the citizenship of its members, which include its shareholders. 776 F. 3d 1175, affirmed.

Result
Affirmed

The Court's reasoning

The Court said Americold’s citizenship depends on its members. Because its members include shareholders, their citizenship counts too.

The vote

  • Joined the judgment
  • Wrote an opinion
Majority · 8joined the Court's opinion
  1. Breyer
  2. Kagan
  3. Thomas
  4. Kennedy
  5. Ginsburg
  6. Sotomayorwrote the opinion
  7. Roberts
  8. Alito
8 justices joined the judgment.

What's next

The appeals court’s ruling remains in place. For this diversity-jurisdiction question, Americold’s shareholders count among its members.

Documents

1

Docket activity

9
  • New analysis added

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

  • New analysis added

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

  • AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

Show 4 more
  • AI analysis generated: Decision Record

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

  • Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata

    Oct 17, 2026 · Court records

  • Opinion added: Americold

    Mar 7, 2016 · Court records

Sources

Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.

Checked Oct 18, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis