-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-02-09
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to articulate a basis for jurisdiction under federal law or diversity.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-02-03
T.T. International Co., Ltd., a Chinese refrigerant exporter, sued BMP International, Inc. and BMP USA, Inc. for breaching their purchase agreements and unjustly enriching themselves by accepting over $70 million in goods without payment. The court rejected T.T.'s breach of contr
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-01-30
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was timely filed because the initial complaint did not establish diversity of citizenship, and the thirty-day removal period began when the defendant received plaintiff's discovery responses clarifying her domicile.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-01-03
The court held that the presence of Florida defendants destroys diversity jurisdiction, and therefore, the case must be remanded to state court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-11-30
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-11-15
The court held that the defendant failed to meet the burden of establishing the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction, as pre-removal payments from the insurer offset the claimed damages.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-11-07
The court held that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claim for dental benefits because it falls within the exclusive review scheme of the Veterans' Judicial Review Act (VJRA).
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-10-26
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and must abstain from exercising jurisdiction under Younger v. Harris principles.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-10-06
Plaintiff's responses to Requests for Admissions can be considered 'other paper' for removal purposes, and an unambiguous admission of damages exceeding $75,000 establishes federal jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-10-04
A defendant seeking removal to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction must establish the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 by a preponderance of the evidence, using plausible allegations and supporting documentation.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-09-14
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to adequately plead the citizenship of the corporate defendant.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-08-17
The court held that it lacked federal question jurisdiction because the plaintiff's complaint, which sought only eviction under state law, did not present a federal question.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-08-16
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-08-01
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to properly plead the citizenship of an LLC, thus failing to establish diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-25
The court held that the defendants failed to meet their burden of proving the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold, thus the case must be remanded.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-06-30
The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss was moot due to an amended complaint and that the plaintiff failed to adequately allege diversity jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-06-02
The Court adopts in part the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, dismissing the case without prejudice because the complaint fails to state a claim and the Court lacks jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-23
A defendant removing a case to federal court must provide specific factual allegations to establish diversity jurisdiction, including the citizenship of all parties and a plausible amount in controversy, which cannot be based on mere information and belief or conclusory statement
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-05-16
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity, as the amount in controversy was not facially apparent from the complaint and attached documents.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-26
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, despite demonstrating diversity of citizenship.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-04-21
The court held that the plaintiff's third amended complaint must be dismissed with prejudice for failing to adequately allege jurisdiction, constituting an impermissible shotgun pleading, and violating local formatting rules.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-04-12
The court held that the amended complaint must be dismissed for failure to establish subject-matter jurisdiction and for failing to meet pleading standards under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 9(b).
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-03-09
The court held that the remainder beneficiaries should be realigned as plaintiffs because the primary purpose of the lawsuit aligns their interests with the plaintiff, thus establishing diversity jurisdiction and denying the motion to remand.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-01-21
The court held that a complaint alleging diversity jurisdiction must state a party's citizenship, not merely their residence, to satisfy federal jurisdictional requirements.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-01-10
The court held that the defendant failed to establish the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus federal jurisdiction was lacking and the case must be remanded.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-11-30
The Court strikes the pro se plaintiff's complaint for failing to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 10, and for failing to establish subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-11-09
The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead the citizenship of the parties and the amount in controversy, requiring an amended complaint.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-10-14
The court held that removal was timely and diversity jurisdiction was sufficiently established, denying the plaintiff's motion to remand.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-09-16
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy, requiring supplementation.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-09-13
The court held that the removal was timely, the defendant did not waive its right to remove, and diversity jurisdiction was established, thus denying the plaintiff's motion for remand.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-09-01
The court granted plaintiff's motion for leave to conduct limited jurisdictional discovery regarding the citizenship of defendant Franklin Madison Group, LLC.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-08-31
The court held that the defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the jurisdictional requirement for diversity jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-07-29
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal diversity jurisdiction by not properly pleading the citizenship of the plaintiff LLC.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-06-04
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-05-20
The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal diversity jurisdiction, as the amount in controversy for an ejectment action cannot be determined by monetary value from the defendant's perspective.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-05-04
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was untimely because it was filed more than thirty days after the plaintiffs filed their amended complaint, which provided sufficient information to ascertain removability.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-04-27
The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-26
The court held that the complaint was an impermissible shotgun pleading and lacked sufficient allegations to establish subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-26
The court held that it lacked diversity jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to establish that defendant Navan, a key party for diversity purposes, was domiciled in Louisiana, and therefore, the LLC was also not diverse.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-22
The court held that the defendant's removal of the case was timely and proper, denying the plaintiff's motion to remand.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-16
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal was insufficient to establish subject matter jurisdiction because it failed to plausibly allege the amount in controversy.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-03
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to adequately allege diversity jurisdiction because it stated the defendants' residences instead of their citizenship.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-02-17
The court held that the amended complaint failed to establish diversity jurisdiction because it only alleged residency, not citizenship, of the defendant.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-02-16
The court held that the removing defendants failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the jurisdictional threshold, thus the case must be remanded to state court.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-01-15
The court held that the removing party failed to establish that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-01-14
The court held that the defendant's notice of removal failed to adequately plead diversity jurisdiction because it did not properly allege the citizenship of the parties, particularly the LLC and one of the individual defendants.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-01-11
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case because the plaintiffs failed to allege any basis for federal jurisdiction and had repeatedly failed to cure such deficiencies in prior filings.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-28
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the complaint failed to allege complete diversity of citizenship.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-12-15
The court held that the defendant failed to establish subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship because the notice of removal and complaint did not sufficiently allege the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-11-27
The court held that the defendants failed to meet their burden of establishing the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction, requiring remand to state court.