Johnson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al

Filing 17

ORDER allowing the defendant additional opportunity to establish federal jurisdiction. Defendant may provide the Court with evidence showing that the amount in controversy in this case exceeds $75,000. (Compliance due by 3/31/2017). If the Defendant fails to do so, the Court will remand this case to the State Court of Bulloch County, Georgia. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 3/10/17. (cmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
STATESBORO DIVISION

SHERON JOHNSON,

*
•

Plaintiff,

*
*

v.

*

WAL-MART STORES EAST,

LP,

CV

617-003

*
*

Defendant.

*
*

ORDER

Plaintiff

and

Defendant

filed this

removed

lawsuit

it

to

in state

this

Court

court

on

in November

January

3,

asserting diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

2016,

2017,

(Doc. 1.)

Based on the complaint and notice of removal, the Court questioned

whether

§ 1332's

Accordingly,

the

amount-in-controversy
Court

ordered

Defendant

evidence supporting federal jurisdiction.

requirement
to

was

submit

(Doc.

8.)

met.1

additional

In response,

the parties filed a joint stipulation stating that they "agree that
the

amount

$75,000.

of

(Doc.

In general,

alleged

damages

at

issue

in

this

case

exceeds"

15 St 2. )

a defendant may remove "any civil action brought

in a State court of which the district courts of the United States

have original jurisdiction" to the district court "embracing the
1

The Court also questioned diversity of citizenship.

But based on

Defendant's filing in response to the Court's concern, the Court is satisfied
that the parties are diverse.

place where such action is pending."
§ 1332,

district

courts

have

28 U.S.C.

original

§ 1441(a).

jurisdiction

Under

over

claims

between citizens of different states if "the matter in controversy
exceeds

the

sum or value

plaintiff

does

complaint,

it

preponderance

not

of

plead

$75,000."

a

specific

is

the

removing

of

the

evidence,

that

1319

Subject-matter

(11th Cir.

F.3d 1255,

1261

(11th Cir.

the

of

And when a

damages

in

her

burden

to

show,

amount

in

controversy

Williams v.

by

a

Best Buy Co.,

2001).

jurisdiction,

the consent of the parties."

§ 1332(a).

amount

defendant's

exceeds the jurisdictional requirement.
269 F.3d 1316,

Id.

moreover,

"cannot be

created by

Morrison v. Allstate Indem.

2000).

Federal courts,

Co., 228

therefore,

have

the obligation to "inquire sua sponte into the issue whenever it
appears

that

jurisdiction

may

be

lacking."

Id.

And

because

litigants may not consent to jurisdiction, courts may be "leery of

any stipulations the parties offer concerning the facts related to
jurisdiction."

Id. at 1275.

Here, Plaintiff's complaint states only that, as a result of

Defendant's negligence, Plaintiff injured her wrist, knee, and back
and "suffered damages including past medical expenses in excess of

$10,000.00 . . . and past and future mental and physical pain and

suffering."

(Doc.

1-1 at 9.)

Similarly,

Defendant's notice of

removal provides that "[u]pon information and belief, the amount in

controversy between Plaintiff and Defendant[]
$75,000."

(Doc. 1 at 2.)

exceeds the sum of

Thus, as the Court noted in its prior

order,

these papers do not establish that the amount in controversy

exceeds $75,000.

The

Court

satisfies

is

also

§ 1332's

unpersuaded

that

the

parties'

amount-in-controversy

stipulation

requirement.

The

stipulation provides that "the parties stipulate and agree that the
amount of alleged damages at issue in this case exceeds the $75,000
jurisdictional

threshold

diversity jurisdiction."

parties
the

"agree

Court

between

for

the

and

required
(Doc.

stipulate

purposes

of

28

15 1 2.)

that

these

establishing

parties . . . ."

essentially asking the

under

It

U.S.C.

also states

numbers
the

(Id.)

§ 1332

are

amount

Thus,

Court to allow them to

the

that the

submitted

in

for

to

controversy

parties

consent

to

are

federal

jurisdiction, which the Court cannot do.
The

establish

Court

will

federal

$75,000.

that

the

Defendant

jurisdiction.

date of this order,

showing

allow

an

additional

opportunity

Within twenty-one days

to

from the

Defendant may provide the Court with evidence

amount

in

controversy

in

If the Defendant fails to do so,

this

case

exceeds

the Court will remand

this case to the State Court of Bulloch County, Georgia.

ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia this

/Cr^ day of March,

2017.

HONOK^LS^J. RANDAL HALL
UNITEDySTATES DISTRICT JUDGE
iRN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA