Lopez v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.

Summary

The court denied Plaintiff Agustina Cruz Lopez’s motion to remand her employment-related action against Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. to California state court. It held that diversity jurisdiction existed because the defendant showed by a preponderance of the evidence that lost wages, including projected front pay through an estimated trial date, placed more than $75,000 in controversy. The court declined to account for potential mitigation of damages in calculating the amount in controversy.

Holdings

1. The amount-in-controversy requirement was satisfied because the value of Lopez's claimed lost wages, including projected front pay, more likely than not exceeded $75,000.
2. Projected front pay representing wages lost after removal may be included in the amount in controversy because future wages are relief that may be awarded on the complaint.
3. The court declined to consider potential mitigation of lost wages when assessing the amount in controversy.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 for purposes of diversity jurisdiction when the complaint did not clearly specify the total amount sought.
2. Whether projected front pay through a conservative estimated trial date could be included in calculating the amount in controversy.
3. Whether potential mitigation of lost wages should be considered in determining the amount in controversy.

Disposition

other