Knoeferl v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.

Filing 10

ORDER directing Defendant to provide sufficient evidence that the jurisdictional amount is in controversy. Compliance due by 11/14/2016. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 10/31/2016. (thb)

IN THE UNITED

FOR THE

STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION

LINDA KNOEFERL,

*
*.

Plaintiff,

*

v.

*

CRACKER BARREL OLD COUNTRY

*

STORE,

CV 1:16-152

*

INC.

*

Defendant.

*

ORDER

On

September

21,

2016,

this

Court

ordered

Defendant

"to

provide sufficient evidence that the jurisdictional amount is in
controversy."
an

(Doc.

affidavit

7.)

In response,

swearing

that

defense counsel provided

plaintiff's

counsel

Plaintiff's damages "far exceeded $75,000.00."

(Doc.

claimed
8.)

Upon

review of the record, the Court still cannot discern whether the

amount in controversy in this case exceeds the jurisdictional
requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

The removing party bears the burden to establish federal

jurisdiction.

Pretka v. Kolter City Plaza,

744, 752 (11th Cir. 2010) .

II, Inc.,

"Where, as here,

not plead a specific amount of damages,

608 F.3d

the plaintiff has

the removing defendant

must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in

controversy

exceeds

the

jurisdictional

requirement."

Id.

(citations

omitted).

uncertainty
must

about"

provide

with

While

the

specific

reasonable

a

defendant

amount

in

factual

deductions,

must

not

controversy,

allegations
reasonable

at

that,

"banish

all

a minimum
"when

inferences,

it

combined

and

other

reasonable extrapolations," allow the Court to conclude that the

amount in controversy is satisfied.
Defendant has
this

Court

not provided sufficient

that

satisfied.

the

amount

Defense

allegation

that

Id. at 754.

the

in

counsel's

amount

in

evidence to

controversy
affidavit

persuade

requirement
a

conclusory

exceeds

controversy

is

is

$75,000.00.

It relies entirely upon plaintiff counsel's representation that
Plaintiff's fall in the Cracker Barrel parking lot resulted in a
claim

worth

certainly
Court

more

could

needs

than

have

more

$75,0000.00.

resulted

proof

preponderance

of

the

Specifically,

this

demonstrating

that

in such a

before

it

evidence

Court
the

While

Plaintiff's

sizeable

can

needs

specific

damages

in

this

claim,

this

that

the

conclude

establishes

that

assertion.

factual
case

fall

allegations
will

exceed

$75,000,000.

Accordingly,
evidence
Defendant

that
has

Once again,

Defendant

the
14

is

ORDERED

jurisdictional

DAYS

from

the

to

amount

date

of

provide
is

this

in
Order

sufficient
controversy.
to

Defendant may rely on "judicial admissions

sworn letters submitted to

the court,

type evidence that may reveal

or

comply.

[], non-

other summary judgment

that the amount in controversy

requirement
Inc.,

satisfied."

F.3d

608

also

is

744,

rely

on

Corp.,

14,

No.

of

contracts,
damages.

3:12-cv-1086,

2013) .

(11th

Cir.

affidavits,

interrogatories,
documentation

754

Pretka

The Court

v.

Kolter

2010).

City

II,

Defendant

The

Plaza

may

declarations,

medical
Id.

at

records,

754-56;

2013 WL 3013864,

stresses that

its

depositions,

and

other

v.

Target

Chewning

at * 1

concern

(M.D.

is

not

in what form Defendant chooses to present its evidence,

the
which

evidence
allow

submitted
it

to

contain

determine

specific
if

the

factual

amount

in

Fla.

as

June

much

but that

allegations
controversy

requirement is actually satisfied.

ORDER ENTERED
October,

at Augusta,

Georgia^ this cf^jTf^day of

2016.

HONCrR^dpfT J. RAtyDAbJHALI/
UNITED/ STATES
SOUTHERN

DISTRICT JUDGE

DISTRICT OF GEORGIA