Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California denied Plaintiff Erin Kathleen Doyle’s motion to remand her disability discrimination and wrongful termination action to state court. The court held that diversity jurisdiction existed because Defendants established by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 based on potential lost wages alone.
Holdings
- The amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 because Defendants established that Plaintiff's claim for lost past wages was approximately $84,073.60.
- Remand was not warranted because diversity jurisdiction was proper.
Questions Presented
- Whether the federal court had diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
- Whether Defendants established by a preponderance of the evidence that Plaintiff's lost past wages alone exceeded the jurisdictional amount.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (14)
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994)(followed)
- Stock W., Inc. v. Confederated Tribes, 873 F.2d 1221, 1225 (9th Cir. 1989)(followed)
- California ex rel. Younger v. Andrus, 608 F.2d 1247, 1249 (9th Cir. 1979)(followed)
- McNutt v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178, 182-83 (1936)(followed)
- Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Libhart v. Santa Monica Dairy Co., 592 F.2d 1062, 1064 (9th Cir. 1979)(followed)
- Guglielmino v. McKee Foods Corp., 506 F.3d 696, 699-700 (9th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Sanchez v. Monumental Life Ins. Co., 102 F.3d 989, 404 (9th Cir. 1996)(followed)
- Matheson v. Progressive Specialty Ins. Co., 319 F.3d 1089, 1090-91 (9th Cir. 2003)(followed)
- Davis v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. Pers. Com., 62 Cal. Rptr. 3d 69, 76-77 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 14.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…