Eva Montalvo v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California remands Eva Montalvo’s employment-law action against Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court held that the defendant did not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, because the plaintiff’s $350,000 settlement demand lacked a substantiated factual basis. The court vacated all deadlines and hearings and directed the Clerk to close the action.

Holdings

1. Defendant failed to plausibly allege that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, so the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the removed action.
2. When a notice of removal plausibly alleges a basis for federal jurisdiction, the court must give the removing defendant an opportunity to establish the jurisdictional requirements by a preponderance of the evidence before remanding.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Defendant established that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 as required for diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
2. Whether Plaintiff's $350,000 settlement demand plausibly established the amount in controversy when the demand lacked a factual basis and the asserted damages were speculative.

Disposition

remanded