Scott Francis Iceberg v. The Kroger Co.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington denies Scott Francis Iceberg’s motion to remand his state-law consumer-protection action against The Kroger Co. to state court. The court holds that Iceberg’s post-removal amendment removing his request for injunctive relief reduced the amount in controversy but did not destroy diversity jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. A post-removal amendment that only reduces the alleged amount in controversy below $75,000 ordinarily does not destroy diversity jurisdiction.
2. Iceberg's amendment did not destroy diversity jurisdiction because it removed only the request for injunctive relief and did not join any nondiverse party; the motion to remand was therefore denied.
3. The removing defendant bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that removal was proper, and removal statutes are strictly construed against federal jurisdiction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a post-removal amendment eliminating injunctive relief and thereby reducing the alleged amount in controversy below $75,000 destroys diversity subject matter jurisdiction.
2. Whether the court was required to remand the action because the amended complaint no longer contained the original request for costly injunctive relief.

Disposition

remanded