Luciano v. GS Operating, LLC

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied plaintiff Pedro Luciano’s motion to remand a wage-and-hour putative class action to state court. The court held that traditional diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), rather than class-action jurisdiction under § 1332(d), governed the removal. It concluded that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 when the plaintiff’s estimated damages were combined with recoverable attorney’s fees and costs.

Holdings

1. The court analyzed removal solely under traditional diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) because GS Operating's removal theory and supporting arguments rested on that provision, notwithstanding incidental references to § 1332(d).
2. GS Operating established by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
3. Attorney's fees and costs that may be recovered by statute or contract count toward the amount in controversy, and GS Operating demonstrated in a non-speculative manner that the recoverable fees and costs could bring the total above $75,000.

Questions Presented

1. Whether federal jurisdiction should be analyzed under traditional diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), rather than class-action jurisdiction under § 1332(d).
2. Whether GS Operating established by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.
3. Whether potentially recoverable attorney's fees and costs may be included in calculating the amount in controversy.

Disposition

remanded