Jake Pehrson v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California sua sponte remands this personal injury action to California state court. The court concludes that Home Depot failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, and therefore diversity jurisdiction was lacking.

Holdings

1. Home Depot failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that more than $75,000 was in controversy because its assertion was unsupported by underlying facts, the complaint alleged no numerical damages, and the statement of damages provided a speculative pain-and-suffering figure while leaving other damages as 'TBD.'
2. The court was required to remand the action to state court because it lacked diversity subject matter jurisdiction.
3. The court would not include speculative civil penalties or attorney fees in the amount in controversy calculation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court had diversity subject matter jurisdiction when the complaint did not specify a damages amount and the notice of removal relied principally on a statement of damages listing $1,000,000 for pain, suffering, and inconvenience.
2. Whether the case had to be remanded sua sponte because Home Depot failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.

Disposition

remanded