Grandoit v. Frigidaire et al

Filing 28

Judge Joseph L. Tauro: ORDER entered ALLOWED re 17 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. See ORDER attached. This case is CLOSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Geraldino-Karasek, Clarilde)(Modified to correct docket entry on 8/4/2010).

Grandoit v. Frigidaire et al

Doc. 28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS GERARD D. GRANDOIT, Plaintiff, v. FRIGIDAIRE, ELECTROLUX WARRANTY CORPORATION and * ELECTROLUX MAJOR APPLIANCES NORTH AMERICA, SHARED SERVICES, Defendant. * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER August 4, 2010 TAURO, J. This action arises out of the mechanical failure of a refrigerator that was manufactured by Defendant Frigidaire and warranted by Defendants Electrolux Warranty Corporation and Electrolux Major Appliances North America. Plaintiff's Complaint asserts nine claims arising under the common law for breach of contract and product liability, as well as one statutory claim pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws c. 93A. Presently at issue is Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction [#17]. Plaintiff has alleged no federal claims against Defendants and, therefore, contends that this court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Plaintiff's Complaint, however, appears to allege damages of only $1,742.12. Even if Plaintiff succeeded in proving a violation of Mass. Gen. Laws c. 93A, such that he would be entitled to treble damages, his damages would still fall far short of the $75,000 threshold necessary to establish diversity

Civil Action No. 10-10298-JLT

Dockets.Justia.com

jurisdiction. Accordingly, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction [#17] is ALLOWED. This case is CLOSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Joseph L. Tauro United States District Judge