Supreme Court of the United States Amount in Controversy

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
News & Analysis as of

California District Court Finds that CAFA’s Amount-in-Controversy Requirement was Satisfied; Denies Motion to Remand

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied plaintiff’s motion to remand, holding that plaintiff’s claim for unpaid wages and overtime satisfied CAFA’s amount-in-controversy requirement. ...more

Supreme Court Establishes New Standards: Removal Pleadings Now Less Burdensome For State Court Suits

Last week, the United States Supreme Court held that a notice of removal from state court to federal court requires only pleading good faith allegations that the amount in controversy exceeds a jurisdictional threshold. The...more

Who Needs Proof? Not The Notice of Removal.

In a previous blog, we explained that the Supreme Court was considering whether a defendant merely has to allege jurisdictional facts or provide evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case....more

Supreme Court Clarifies the Standard Governing Removal of Class Action Cases to Federal Court

The US Supreme Court ruled last Monday that class action defendants need not provide evidentiary submissions in support of their attempts to remove a case from state to federal court. Rather, they need only include in their...more

Removing a Barrier: The Supreme Court Holds That, Under CAFA, Notices of Removal Need Not Include Evidence Supporting the Amount...

On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens that a class action defendant need only allege the requisite amount of controversy “plausibly” in the notice of...more

No Proof Necessary: SCOTUS Rules Defendant’s Notice Of Removal Under CAFA Need Not Include Evidence of The Amount In Controversy

On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split in holding that a defendant need not supply evidence of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act...more

Supreme Court: Evidence of Amount in Controversy Not Required at Removal

Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant removing a putative class action from state to federal court pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) need not submit evidence to...more

Supreme Court Confirms That A Notice Of Removal Requires Only A “Plausible Allegation” That The Amount In Controversy Has Been Met

The Supreme Court has held that a notice of removal requires only a “plausible allegation that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold,” and confirmed that a notice of removal need not include evidence...more

Supreme Court: Companies Fighting State Class Actions Can Remove to Federal Court Without Evidence of Damages

The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”) has found its way to the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court several times in the last two years, as plaintiffs and defendants seek to define the parameters of the federal law...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Fairness Act’s Removal Requirement: 'Liberal Rules' Do Not Require Evidence of Amount in...

Class action defendants need not include evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), thanks to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in...more

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Removing Class Actions to Federal Court

Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, No. 13-719, a case involving the procedural requirements for removing a class action from state to federal court under the Class...more

Supreme Court Oral Argument in Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument this week in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, No. 13-719. This case involves whether a defendant must provide evidence with its notice of removal under the Class Action...more

CAFA? Don’t mind if I do: Ninth Circuit Overturns Lowdermilk’s Legal Certainty Standard to Remove Class Actions Under CAFA

In a boon to defendants seeking to remove cases to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), the Ninth Circuit has overturned a rule requiring defendants to show to a “legal certainty” that the...more

Supreme Court Rejects Class Plaintiff’s Attempt To Avoid Federal Court By Stipulation Damages Will Be Less Than $5,000,000

In Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Knowles, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a class-action plaintiff may not avoid the effect of the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) by “stipulating” he will not seek damages in excess of...more

High Court Agrees Class Rep’s Stipulation Doesn’t Bar Federal Jurisdiction

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles, resolved the debate between the plaintiffs’ bar and defense bar regarding whether a class representative’s stipulation that damages would not exceed $5...more

Supreme Court Holds Class Plaintiff Cannot Avoid Removal By Stipulating Damages Under CAFA’s Jurisdictional Threshold

On March 19, the Supreme Court held that a class action plaintiff’s pre-class certification stipulation that the class would not seek damages exceeding the Class Action Fairness Act’s (CAFA) $5 million amount-in-controversy...more

Supreme Court Eliminates Jurisdictional Escape Hatch To The Class Action Fairness Act

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles confirms that a plaintiff cannot avoid federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) by stipulating that the class will seek less...more

High Court Rules Pre-Certification Damages Stipulation Cannot Defeat Federal Jurisdiction Arising Under the Class Action Fairness...

In a much-anticipated ruling that could significantly restrict the efforts of class action plaintiffs and their lawyers to avoid litigating in federal court, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a named...more

U.S. Supreme Court Opens the Door Wider for Defendants to Remove Class Actions to Federal Court in Standard Fire Insurance v....

The U.S. Supreme Court resoundingly signaled an end to a form of statutory manipulation in the class action arena Tuesday. A unanimous court held that named plaintiffs in class actions may not defeat federal removal...more

CAFA Jurisdiction Cannot Be Evaded by Limiting Amount in Controversy

The U.S. Supreme Court holds in a 9–0 decision that class action plaintiffs cannot promise to limit damages in an effort to remain below the Class Action Fairness Act's $5 million federal jurisdictional threshold....more

Classy Move: The Supreme Court Rebuffs Class Action Forum Manipulation

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued its first decision reviewing the scope of removal jurisdiction under the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). In Knowles v. Standard Fire Insurance Co., No. 11-1450 (U.S.), the...more

Supreme Court Rejects Stipulation by Proposed Class Representative as Defeating Federal Removal Under Class Action Fairness Act of...

In a decision strengthening the ability of defendants in state court class actions to remove those cases to federal court, on March 19, 2013, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held in Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles,1...more

Supreme Court Unanimously Holds Plaintiffs Can't Stipulate Around CAFA

On Tuesday morning, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decisively closed a loophole in the Class Action Fairness Act, holding in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles that a purported stipulation by the named plaintiff to seek...more

Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Plaintiff’s Effort to Avoid Federal Jurisdiction Under CAFA

In a unanimous decision issued on March 19, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the named plaintiff in a proposed class action lawsuit cannot defeat federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA or the...more

Class Action Update: Standard Fire Extinguishes Plaintiff’s Precertification Attempt to Avoid Federal Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has put a stop to a tactic used by class action plaintiffs to avoid federal court. On Tuesday, the Court held that a named plaintiff’s precertification affidavit capping the damages could not bind the...more

41 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2