Ruelas v. Costco Wholesale Corporation

Filing 5

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/21/2020 REMANDING CASE to San Joaquin County Superior Court. Certified copy of remand order sent to other court. CASE CLOSED. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4

Rafael Carrillo, Esq. (SBN 289288)
[e-mail]
CARRILLO LAW CENTER, APC
333 E. Channel Street, 1st Floor
Stockton, CA 95202
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Attorney for Plaintiff,
MA DE LOURDES RUELAS
Law Offices of

MATHENY SEARS LINKERT & JAIME LLP
MATTHEW C. JAIME (SBN 140340)
SARAH M. WOOLSTON (SBN 320510)
3638 American River Drive
Sacramento, California 95864
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]

12

Attorneys for Defendant, COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION
13
14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17

MA DE LOURDES RUELAS,

18

Plaintiff,

19

v.

20
21

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION,
and DOES 1-10, inclusive,

Case No. 2:20-cv-01085-KJM-AC
(SAN JOAQUIN SUPERIOR CASE NO:
STK-CV-UPI-2019-5162)
STIPULATION TO REMAND REMOVED
ACTION

Defendant.

22
23
24
25

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between MA DE LOURDES RUELAS

26

(“Plaintiff”) and Defendant COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION (“Defendant” or

27

“Costco”), by and through their counsel of record, as follows:

28

///
///

-1-

I.

1
2
3
4

1.

RECITALS

Whereas, Plaintiff MA DE LOURDES RUELAS filed a Complaint on March 9,

2020 against Defendant COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, in the Superior Court of
California, County of San Joaquin.

5

2.

Whereas, Defendant answered on May 28, 2020 in the Superior Court of California,

6
7
8
9
10

County of San Joaquin.
3.

Whereas, Plaintiff’s damages at the time of removal were in excess of $75,000.00

on April 30, 2020 in her Statement of Damages.
4.

Whereas, on May 29, 2020, Defendant Costco removed this matter to the United

11

States District Court for the Eastern District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(b) and
12
13

1446(b)(3) based on diversity jurisdiction because the amount of controversy exceeded $75,000.00

14

and the parties were completely diverse.

15

5.

Whereas, Plaintiff now confirms her damages, in any form, shall not and will not,

16

under any circumstance, exceed $75,000.00.
17

II.

18
19
20
21

1.

STIPULATIONS

The parties stipulate that because Plaintiff’s damages shall never under any

circumstance exceed $75,000.00, this court no longer has subject matter jurisdiction of Plaintiff’s
civil action as this case does not meet the minimum amount in controversy.

22

2.

The parties further stipulate, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1447(c), to the remand of

23
24
25
26
27

Plaintiff’s civil action to the Stanislaus County Superior Court.
3.

Plaintiff hereby agrees and stipulates that her damages, resulting from the alleged

incident that occurred on defendant’s premises on or about April 24, 2017, that are the subject of
the within action (formerly SAN JOAQUIN SUPERIOR CASE NO: STK-CV-UPI-2019-5162)

28

(hereinafter “the litigation”), are hereby capped at $74,999.99.

-2-

4.

1
2

$74,999.99, she hereby waives the right to claim such damages as a result of the litigation.

3
4

Plaintiff hereby agrees and stipulates that if her damages should exceed

5.

Plaintiff hereby agrees and stipulates that her recovery of damages in the litigation,

including but not limited to economic damages and non-economic damages, are hereby capped at

5

$74,999.99.
6

6.

7

Plaintiff hereby agrees and stipulates that if her recovery of damages in the

8

litigation should exceed $74,999.99, either by verdict or other means, she hereby waives the right

9

to recover any such damages in excess of $74,999.99.

10

7.

Plaintiff hereby agrees and stipulates that should any award or judgment be

11

rendered or entered against defendant with damages in excess of $74,999.99, she will execute any
12
13

necessary documents to reduce such award or judgment to $74,999.99 in damages, and will not

14

execute on any award or judgment in excess of $74,999.99 in damages. The damages cap is

15

inclusive of any costs and fees, including attorney fees.

16

8.

The parties hereby agree that because the amount in controversy in this matter does

17
18

not exceed $75,000, that this court no longer possesses subject matter jurisdiction.
9.

19
20
21

The parties further agree that in light of their agreement to cap Plaintiff’s damages

at $74,999.99, the matter should be remanded to the SAN JOAQUIN SUPERIOR CASE NO:
STK-CV-UPI-2019-5162, because the amount in controversy will never exceed $75,000.00.

22

10.

WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing the parties hereby stipulate and agree that

23
24
25
26
27

the case be REMANDED to the SAN JOAQUIN SUPERIOR CASE NO: STK-CV-UPI-20195162.
///
///

28

///

-3-

1
2
3

11.

The parties stipulate and request that an Order be issued in accordance with this

Stipulation.
DATED: June____, 2020

CARRILLO LAW CENTER, APC

4
5

___________________________________
Rafael Carrillo
Attorney for Plaintiff,
MA DE LOURDES RUELAS

6
7
8
9

DATED: June___, 2020

MATHENY SEARS LINKERT JAIME,
LLP

10

___________________________________
Matthew Jaime
Attorney for Defendant
COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-4-

1
2

ORDER
3
4

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court orders as follows:

5

1. The Parties’ Stipulation to Remand Removed Action is approved.
6
7
8
9
10

2. Eastern District of California case number 2:20-cv-01085-KJM-AC, RUELAS v.
COSTCO, is remanded to San Joaquin County Superior Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: July 21, 2020.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-5-