Brown et al v. Alcoa Inc et al

Filing 42

ORDER: Upon further reflection on 31 Memorandum Order which remanded this matter to the undersigned to determine if the amount in controversy is satisfied, and reconsidering the courts 40 Order allowing the parties to submit evidence as to the am ount in controversy, we hereby RESCIND the 40 Order. IT IS ORDERED that the 40 Order issued by this court on 10/14/2015 is hereby RESCINDED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants may submit a brief on the issue of jurisdiction on or before 11/23/2015 and any opposition may be submitted on or before 12/3/2015. A reply brief may be submitted on or before 12/10/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kathleen Kay on 10/26/2015. (crt,Putch, A)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAKE CHARLES DIVISION

PAUL BROWN, ET AL

:

DOCKET NO. 14-cv-3534

VERSUS

:

JUDGE MINALDI

ALCOA, INC., ET AL

:

MAGISTRATE JUDGE KAY

ORDER

Upon further reflection on [31] the Memorandum Order which remanded this matter to the
undersigned to determine if the amount in controversy is satisfied, and reconsidering the court’s
[40] Order allowing the parties to submit evidence as to the amount in controversy, we hereby
RESCIND the [40] Order. In order to comply with the [31] Memorandum Order we will reexamine the evidence before us filed at the time of removal in order to determine if the “amountin-controversy requirement is satisfied between the compensatory damages and injunctive relief
sought.” Doc. 31. See also Gebbia v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 233 F.3d 880, 883 (5th Cir. 2000)
(“The jurisdictional facts that support removal must be judged at the time of removal.”)
The court, in accordance with established jurisprudence, will make a determination if the
defendant has shown by a preponderance of the evidence whether it is facially apparent that the
claims exceed $75,000 or if facts set forth in the removing petition support a finding of the requisite
amount in controversy. Luckett v Delta Airlines, Inc. 171 F.3d 295, 298 (5th Cir.1999). The
parties are invited to re-brief this issue but additional evidence will not be considered.
Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the #40 Order issued by this court on October 14, 2015 is hereby
RESCINDED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants may submit a brief on the issue of jurisdiction
on or before November 23, 2015 and any opposition thereto may be submitted on or before
December 3, 2015. A reply brief may be submitted on or before December 10, 2015.
THUS DONE this 26th day of October, 2015.