Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington denied Plaintiff Auston Waldrop’s motion to remand a Washington wage-and-hour class action to state court. The court held that the requirements for jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act were satisfied, including minimal diversity, a class of at least 100 members, and an amount in controversy exceeding $5 million when alleged damages and attorneys’ fees were considered.
Holdings
- The defendant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $5 million.
- Remand was not warranted because CAFA jurisdiction was established.
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendant established by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded CAFA's $5 million jurisdictional threshold.
- Whether the defendant's assumptions concerning the alleged wage-and-hour violations, violation rate, statutory damages, and future attorney fees were reasonable for purposes of CAFA jurisdiction.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (8)
- Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, 574 U.S. 81, 89 (2014)(followed)
- Perez v. Rose Hills Co., 131 F.4th 804, 808-809(followed)
- Ibarra v. Manheim Invs., Inc., 775 F.3d 1193, 1198-1199(followed)
- Jauregui v. Roadrunner Transp. Servs., Inc., 28 F.4th 989, 993(followed)
- Serrieh v. Jill Acquisition LLC, 707 F. Supp. 3d 968, 974(followed)
- Arias v. Residence Inn by Marriott, 936 F.3d 920, 927-928(followed)
- Fritsch v. Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC, 899 F.3d 785, 794, 796 n.6(followed)
- Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corp., 290 F.3d 1043, 1047(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…