Miller v. Target Corporation
Filing
12
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 10/10/12 sustaining 9 Motion to Remand; case is REMANDED to Jefferson Circuit Court. cc:counsel, Jefferson Circuit Court (DAK)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-CV-477-H
JULIA MILLER
PLAINTIFF
V.
TARGET CORPORATION
DEFENDANT
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff originally filed this personal injury lawsuit in Jefferson Circuit Court.
Subsequently, on August 8, 2012, Defendant timely removed the case to this Court based on
diversity of citizenship and that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000. Plaintiff has now
moved to remand based on the argument that the preponderance of evidence fails to show that
the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional limit.
Defendant has the burden of showing that the jurisdictional amount has been met in these
circumstances. Gafford v. General Electric Company, 997 F.2d 150, 158 (6th Cir. 1993).
However, in its response, Defendant has mentioned nothing about the nature of the accident or
the potential injuries involved which would suggest damages of any amount or for that matter
more than $75,000. The only argument asserted is that Plaintiff has refused to stipulate that the
amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. However, the Court does not believe that Plaintiff’s
failure to stipulate is evidence that the amount actually does exceed $75,000. A defendant must
make some argument based on the facts of the case that the amount at issue exceeds the
jurisdictional amount. Having failed to do so, Defendant has not met its burden to sustain
federal jurisdiction.
Being otherwise sufficiently advised,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to remand is SUSTAINED and this
case is REMANDED to Jefferson Circuit Court.
October 10, 2012
cc:
Counsel of Record & Jefferson Circuit Court
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?