Knight v. Climbing Magazine et al

Filing 13

ORDERED that Ds' # 8 Brief concerning removal is GRANTED. Accordingly, the court shall accept Ds' removal of this action and exercise diversity jurisdiction over the complaint. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 5/3/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 BRIAN KNIGHT, 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 CLIMBING MAGAZINE, et al., 13 Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 3:11-CV-0146!LRH!RAM ORDER 14 15 Before the court is defendants Climbing Magazine and SKRAM Media LLC’s (collectively 16 “defendants”) brief that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 as required by 28 U.S.C. § 17 1332(a). Doc. #8.1 18 On March 14, 2011, the court entered an order finding that defendants had failed to 19 establish that removal on the basis of diversity jurisdiction was proper in their petition for removal 20 (Doc. #1) and granted defendants the opportunity to establish that the amount in controversy 21 between the parties exceeds $75,000 as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).2 Doc. #5. 22 Where, as here, it is not facially evident from the face of the complaint that the amount in 23 24 1 25 2 26 Refers to the court’s docket 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) provides that the district courts of the United States shall have original jurisdiction over all civil actions between citizens of different states where the amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds $75,000. 1 controversy exceeds $75,000, “the removing defendant bears the burden of establishing, by a 2 preponderance of the evidence, that the amount in controversy exceeds $[75],000.” Sanchez v. 3 Monumental Life Ins. Co., 102 F.3d 398, 404 (9th Cir. 1996). Here, defendants contend that the 4 amount in controversy requirement is met because plaintiff Brian Knight has stated that his 5 damages are in excess of $100,000 and that any settlement amount “less than six figures would be 6 insulting.” See Doc. #8, Exhibit A. A plaintiff’s statement of damages after the filing of the 7 complaint is relevant evidence establishing the amount in controversy. See Cohen v. Petsmart, Inc., 8 281 F.3d 837, 840 (9th Cir. 2002). Therefore, the court finds that defendants have proffered 9 sufficient evidence establishing an amount in controversy greater than $75,000. Accordingly, the 10 court shall accept defendants’ removal of this action and exercise diversity jurisdiction over the 11 complaint. 12 13 14 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants’ brief concerning removal (Doc. #8) is GRANTED. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 DATED this 3rd day of May, 2011. 17 18 19 __________________________________ LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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?