Wilson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Companies

Filing 22

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 12/6/2010. For the reasons set forth, 12 Motion to Remand is DENIED. cc: Counsel (AEP)

Wilson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Companies

Doc. 22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:10-CV-256-H STEVEN WILSON V. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Steven Wilson, has moved to remand his complaint to Hardin Circuit Court. In support of his motion he has stated that if a judgment in excess of $74,999 "is issued, Plaintiff stipulates that he will not pursue said judgment." Defendant has objected to remand on the grounds that it remains exposed to a judgment in excess of the jurisdictional amount. The Court has dealt with these issues on numerous occasions. A plaintiff may clarify the amount of their demand in an unequivocal manner. Egan v. Premier Scales & Systems, 237 F.Supp.2d 774 (W.D. Ky. 2002). Whatever else may be the circumstances, Plaintiff has not unequivocally clarified his demand for damages potentially in excess of $75,000. Id. at 778. Quite the opposite, Plaintiff apparently plans to pursue a judgment in any amount, yet promise not to seek actual collection of it. This stance does not meet this Court's requirements. Being otherwise sufficiently advised, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to remand is DENIED. DEFENDANT PLAINTIFF

Dockets.Justia.com

December 6, 2010

cc:

Counsel of Record