Amount in Controversy

News & Analysis as of

Federal Court Rejects Foreign Employee’s Attempt to Avoid Forum Selection Clause on Grounds He Signed Under Duress Upon Arriving...

Earlier this fall, the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts transferred an employee’s declaratory judgment action to the Eastern District of Michigan pursuant to a forum-selection clause in a non-compete agreement over the...more

HHS Proposes Rules to Eliminate Backlog … in 5 Years

On June 28, 2016, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a series of regulatory changes in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) designed to curtail the massive backlog of Medicare claim appeals....more

Dart Cherokee: Shifting The Burden To Plaintiff in Federal Diversity Cases

Under Dart, a Plaintiff contesting that the jurisdictional threshold has not been met must now come forward with evidence that establishes the jurisdictional amount in controversy is not present. We’ve all seen this...more

Michigan Supreme Court Clarifies That District Court Jurisdiction is Determined by Looking at the “Amount in Controversy” at the...

Michigan district courts have exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction over civil actions when the “amount in controversy” does not exceed $25,000. So what happens if a plaintiff files a lawsuit in district court seeking damages...more

The Demand Approach: Fifth Circuit clarifies that arbitration demand, not award, determines amount in controversy

In a case of first impression for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the court held that in a proceeding to confirm an arbitral award under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), the amount of the demand in...more

The Amount-in-Controversy Requirement Presents an “Obstacle” to CAFA Removal

In Pazol v. Tough Mudder Inc., No. 15-1640, — F.3d —-, 2016 WL 1638045 (1st Cir. Apr. 26, 2016), the First Circuit analyzed the “reasonable probability” standard that a defendant must satisfy to support CAFA’s $5 million...more

Pazol v. Tough Mudder, Inc.: Muddying the waters on proof of jurisdictional facts under CAFA?

The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) was intended to make it easier for defendants to remove class action lawsuits from state court to federal court. For example, CAFA introduced the concept of minimal as opposed to...more

New York Federal Court Considers Procedural Attacks To Arbitration Confirmation Proceedings

Late last month, a federal district court in New York tackled procedural challenges to an arbitration confirmation proceeding. The arbitration arose from a dispute between an insurer and its reinsurer over the amount due to...more

Fifth Circuit Finds Federal Jurisdiction Over $10,000 Arbitration Award

The Fifth Circuit recently addressed a hard question: what should the court consider when determining the amount in controversy for purposes of federal jurisdiction over an arbitration award? The court decided to rely on the...more

Fifth Circuit: Diversity Jurisdiction Over FINRA Award Based on Demand

The Fifth Circuit Bar Association’s summary reports: “Appellants were investors who suffered financial losses as a result of R. Allen Stanford’s Ponzi scheme. In their arbitration complaint, they sought $80 million in...more

Challenge to the Constitutionality of the Post-Grant Review Process, Thwarted

“In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved…” unless the controversy involves the validity of a patent as determined by the Patent and...more

Inside The New Complex Business Litigation Program For The New Jersey Superior Court

After years and years of discussion and debate, the New Jersey Supreme Court, by Order of Chief Justice Rabner, has implemented a state-wide Complex Business Litigation Program (the “Program”) designed to address the...more

California District Court Finds CAFA’s Amount-in-Controversy Requirement Satisfied and No Local Controversy Alleged; Denies Motion...

The Southern District of California denied a plaintiff’s motion to remand a putative class action removed pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), where the plaintiff had alleged that the primary defendant’s product,...more

The $5 Million CAFA Question: Can You Provide Evidentiary Proof?

In December, we wrote about the recent Supreme Court decision in Owens v. Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. In Owens, the Court held that class action defendants need not provide evidentiary submissions in support of their...more

CAFA Removal: A Second Bite at the Apple?

Until a couple of years ago, plaintiffs’ attorneys seeking to keep their class actions in state court would frequently stipulate that they would not seek damages in excess of the $5 million CAFA threshold. This practice fell...more

Middle District of Florida Remands Insurance Coverage Class Action, Reasoning Amount In Controversy Is Determined From Value Of...

The value of the claim at issue, not the value of the policy limit, is considered for purposes of determining the amount in controversy in an insurance coverage class action. That, the Middle District of Florida found, is the...more

Creative Construction: The Ninth Circuit Relaxes Removal Statute’s Timeliness Test in Class Action Fairness Act Cases

In Jordan v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC, No. 14-35943 and 15-35113, 2015 WL 1447217 (Apr. 1, 2015 9th Cir.), a Ninth Circuit panel held that cases subject to the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) become “removable” only when...more

Ninth Circuit Holds Defendant Can Remove Within 30-Days After CAFA Grounds Are Ascertained, Even Where Complaint Provided Basis...

A Ninth Circuit panel has held that a defendant may remove a case to federal court within 30 days after the CAFA ground for removal can first be ascertained, even where plaintiff’s complaint, filed years earlier, provided a...more

Employer Met Its Burden Of Proving At Least $5 Million Amount In Controversy For CAFA Removal

In this putative class action, plaintiffs alleged that Knight Transportation had misclassified them as independent contractors when in fact they were employees who were not reimbursed their lease-related and fuel costs as...more

Do Treble Damages Count Toward Minimum Amounts In Controversy?

Today’s post involves the relationship between N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 and amounts in controversy—especially the new amount in controversy in the statute that governs assigning cases to the North Carolina Business Court....more

Do Medical Records Support Removal And Do Unripe Claims Get Dismissed

In Alilin v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 6:14-cv-1183-Orl-41DAB (D. for M.D. Fla., Jan. 30, 2015), Judge Carlos Mendoza denied Alilin's challenge to the amount in controversy prong of State Farm's removal to federal...more

High Court Finds Plausible Showing of Amount in Controversy Sufficient to Remove Action

In a decision that may make it somewhat easier for defendants to remove putative class actions from state to federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that defendants in such cases do not need to offer evidence in their...more

2014 SCOTUS Term: Important Developments in the Class-Action Arena

In This Issue: - Those Who Provide Investment Advice on Unsecured Securities Are Subject to Class Actions - A “Mass Action” Under the Class Action Fairness Act Requires at Least 100 Individual...more

CAFA Removal Jurisdiction: Using a Plaintiff’s Complaint Against It

Most cases involving the existence of removal jurisdiction under CAFA involve the $5 million amount in controversy. In a recent Third Circuit opinion, determining whether or not the putative class had the requisite 100...more

Ninth Circuit Issues Companion Cases Addressing Evidence Required To Show That The Amount In Controversy Requirement Has Been Met...

Through a pair of opinions issued the same day, the Ninth Circuit attempted to clarify the evidence required for a defendant to meet its burden of showing that the amount in controversy exceeds CAFA’s $5 million threshold...more

74 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×