Amount In Controversy

1,259 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Schwartzben v. Nat'l Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-09-08
  The court held that removal was proper because diversity jurisdiction existed and the plaintiff's actions constituted bad faith, thus allowing removal beyond the one-year statutory limit.
• Kohlmeier v. Am. Honda Motor Co., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-09-08
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to the addition of non-diverse defendants and remanded the case to state court.
• Morris v. Sun Cmtys., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-09-07
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction based on the notice of removal and ordered the defendant to supplement the notice.
• Castro v. TK Elevator Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-09-01
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity, as it did not meet its burden to prove the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
• Latite Roofing & Sheet Metal, LLC. v. Am. Home Assurance Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-08-25
  The court held that the complaint failed to adequately allege diversity of citizenship, thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
• Ellis v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-08-18
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold, thus granting the plaintiff's motion to remand.
• Stempien v. Cent. Mut. Ins. Co.
  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.
• Amara v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-08-15
  The court held that the plaintiff's state-law claims are preempted by federal law, and the federal Magnuson Moss Warranty Act claim fails because it depends on the state claims and lacks sufficient amount in controversy.
• Mathews v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-08-10
  The court held that the defendant tobacco company failed to meet its burden to show fraudulent joinder, and therefore, the case must be remanded to state court due to the forum defendant rule.
• Midland Credit Mgmt. Inc. v. LaPointe
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-08-05
  The court held that the defendant's objections were insufficient to warrant rejection of the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, and that the case should be remanded for lack of federal jurisdiction.
• Zelonka v. Gyarmati
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-08-01
  The court held that the notice of removal was timely and that the defendants plausibly established the amount in controversy exceeding the federal jurisdictional minimum.
• Veterans Cap. Corp. v. Future Farm Techs., Inc.
  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.
• Alac Enters., Inc. v. Geico Marine Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-07-28
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish the existence of subject matter jurisdiction because the amount in controversy did not facially appear to exceed the $75,000 requirement, and the defendant did not provide sufficient evidence to meet this burden.
• Jones v. Bank of Am.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-07-25
  The court held that the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration was unwarranted as it failed to present any basis for altering the prior dismissal order and was an attempt to relitigate previously decided matters.
• Zaylor Enters., LLC v. Spinutech, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-07-25
  The court held that the contractual limitation of liability clause was ambiguous and denied dismissal on that ground, but granted dismissal of the unjust enrichment claim for failure to plead it properly as an alternative count.
• Leventhal v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-07-24
  The court held that the defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional requirement for diversity jurisdiction.
• Dener v. Kimberly-Clark Corp. of WI
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-07-19
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the amended complaint affirmatively pleaded damages below the diversity jurisdiction threshold.
• Dominique v. Geovera Speciality Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-07-12
  The court held that pre-removal payments must be considered when calculating the amount in controversy, and if these payments reduce the amount below the jurisdictional threshold, the case must be remanded.
• Gundogdu v. WDF-4 Wood Harbor Park Owner, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-07-11
  A federal court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over a removed state-court eviction case where the removal is based on the plaintiff's counterclaims or defenses, and abstention is appropriate if the case were treated as originally filed in federal court.
• Drip Cap. Inc. v. Elite Catch Seafood, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-07-05
  The court held that the defendants' motion to dismiss lacked merit on all grounds, including standing, venue, subject-matter jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, and joinder.
• Soto Rios v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-07-01
  The court held that removal was untimely because the civil cover sheet provided notice of the amount in controversy, but denied attorney's fees as the removal basis was objectively reasonable.
• Wright v. Englewood Beach & Yacht Club Ass'n, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-07-01
  The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to insufficient pleading of diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy.
• Jones v. Bank of Am.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-06-30
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction, but granted leave to amend due to potential differences from prior actions. The motion to disqualify the magistrate judge was denied.
• Amie Chapel Missionary Baptist Church v. First Nat'l Ins. Co. of Am.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-06-22
  The court held that a defendant can establish the amount in controversy using extrinsic evidence, such as a plaintiff's verified interrogatory answers, even if the complaint itself does not specify damages.
• Antonova v. S. Owners Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-06-16
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish federal jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy, requiring remand.
• Packer v. Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-06-13
  The court held that the plaintiff's pre-suit demand letter and civil cover sheet provided sufficient evidence that the amount in controversy more likely than not exceeded $75,000, thus denying the motion to remand.
• Jacobs v. Am. Fam. Connect Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-05-24
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to the amount in controversy not exceeding $75,000 and therefore granted the motion to remand.
• Tavares v. Pelican Int'l, Inc.
  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
• Dillashaw v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co.
  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.
• Chase v. Holiday CVS, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-05-13
  The court held that a Civil Cover Sheet alone is insufficient to establish the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction, and a defendant must provide additional evidence to meet this burden. The court also held that attorneys' fees for removal are not warranted when the d
• Pomet v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.
  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.
• Hernandez v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-04-14
  The court held that the defendant insurer failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, and therefore, the case must be remanded to state court.
• Metalizing Tech. Servs. LLC v. Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-04-14
  The court held that permissive intervention is appropriate, but LEAD must provide evidence of its citizenship to establish federal jurisdiction.
• Dumond v. Carrington
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-04-14
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed because it failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction and did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Penate Suarez v. Holiday CVS, L.L.C.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-04-11
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the amount in controversy did not exceed $75,000, and therefore, removal was improper.
• Caldwell v. Land & Habitat Conservation, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-04-08
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the parties were not diverse and the amount in controversy did not exceed $75,000.
• Kelts v. King Ocean Servs.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-04-06
  The court held that the case must be dismissed without prejudice because the plaintiffs failed to allege complete diversity of citizenship, a requirement for federal diversity jurisdiction.
• Creative Choice Homes XXX, LLC v. Amtax Holdings 690, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-04-05
  Limited partners of two affordable housing apartment complexes in Tampa sought to remove the general partners for breaching the partnership agreements by making unauthorized affiliate loans, diverting partnership funds for non-partnership purposes, improperly distributing cash fl
• JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Hendricks
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-03-24
  The court denied the defendant's emergency request for a temporary restraining order and remanded the case to state court.
• Adams v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-03-21
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish the amount in controversy by a preponderance of the evidence, thus failing to demonstrate federal subject matter jurisdiction.
• Cavaliere v. Comcast Corp.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-03-18
  The court held that the amended complaint was a shotgun pleading and that subject matter jurisdiction was lacking, warranting dismissal without prejudice.
• Beverly v. Sunbelt Rentals, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-03-14
  The court held that the defendant failed to meet its burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold for removal.
• Bethune v. SBE ENT Holdings, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-03-13
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the jurisdictional threshold for diversity jurisdiction.
• Perlin v. Bank of Am., N.A.
  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.
• Balis v. Martin
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-02-04
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
• WEI v. Zoox, Inc.
  Del. Ch.· 2022-01-31
  The Court of Chancery granted in part Respondent's motion for a protective order, holding that while the proportionality requirement of Rule 26 does not limit discovery in appraisal proceedings based on the size of a petitioner's stake, policy considerations dictate that appraisa
• Freeman v. Neptune Trucking, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-01-28
  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 case must be remanded to state court.
• Gosine v. Walmart Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-01-24
  The court held that the plaintiff's allegations against the store manager, even if suspicious, established a colorable claim under Florida law, precluding removal based on fraudulent joinder.
• Pantoja v. GeoVera Specialty Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-01-20
  The court held that the removing defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, and therefore, the case must be remanded to state court.
• Morrison v. Target Corp.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-01-18
  The court held that the defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded the $75,000 jurisdictional minimum required for removal.