Maye et al v. The IL Bridge Fund, LLC et al

Filing 3

ORDER that Defendants, no later than fourteen days from the date of this Order, are directed to submit evidence in the form contemplated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) supporting their claim that the amount in controversy as to this matter exceeds $75,000. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 3/8/2011. (CR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION JOHN R. MAYE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CASE NO: 8:11-cv-467-T-33EAJ

THE IL BRIDGE FUND, LLC, et al., Defendants. _______________________________/ ORDER This cause comes before the Court pursuant to Defendants' Notice of Removal (Doc. # 1). diversity of citizenship. Defendants base the removal on

See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441.

While Defendants properly allege that the parties are diverse, Defendants, as to amount in controversy, state in a conclusory fashion that "the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000.00." Doc. # 1 at ¶ 2. Such a facial allegation is not enough to

satisfy removal unless the jurisdictional amount is apparent from the complaint. Having considered the complaint in this

action, it fails to meet the demands for establishing amount in controversy. The complaint alleges only that "the amount The fact that the loan

in controversy exceeds $15,000.00."

involved was in the amount of $190,940.00 is not necessarily indicative of the amount in controversy. In Williams v. Best Buy Company, Inc., 269 F.3d 1316,

1319-20 (11th Cir. 2001), the Eleventh Circuit held that if the requisite jurisdictional amount is not facially apparent from the complaint (as is the case here), the district court should look to the notice of removal and may require the defendant to submit evidence supporting its claim. "A

conclusory allegation in the notice of removal that the jurisdictional amount is satisfied, without setting forth the underlying facts supporting such an assertion, is insufficient to meet the defendant's burden." Id. Further, it is the

removing defendant's burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeds the

jurisdictional amount. Accordingly, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: Defendants, no later than fourteen days from the date of this Order, are directed to submit evidence in the form contemplated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) supporting their claim that the amount in controversy as to this matter exceeds $75,000. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 8th day of March, 2011.

2

Copies: All Counsel of Record

3