Blackburn et al v. Citation Oil & Gas Corporation

Filing 10

ORDER denying 7 Motion to Remand to State Court, as more fully set out. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 9/10/15. (jw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JACKIE BLACKBURN and
BESSIE BLACKBURN, Husband and
Wife,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CITATION OIL & GAS CORPORATION,
a foreign corporation,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIV-15-780-R

ORDER
Plaintiffs have filed a Motion to Remand (Doc. No. 7), to which Defendant has
responded. Having considered the parties' submissions, the Court finds as follows.
Defendant removed this action from the District Court of Stephens County on June
25, 2015. The basis for removal by Defendant was the Court's diversity jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1332. In the Notice of Removal Defendant asserted that Plaintiffs are citizens of
Oklahoma and that as a corporation it is a citizen of both Texas and Delaware. With regard
to the amount in controversy, Defendant asserted the threshold of $75,000 mandated by 28
U.S.C. § 1332 was met because, although Plaintiffs limited their demand for damages in the
state court petition to $74,999.00, they were also seeking attorneys' fees. Attorneys fees are
available to Plaintiffs should they prevail pursuant to Okla Stat. tit. 12 § 940.1 Defendant
argues that fees are included in the calculation of the amount in controversy for purposes of

1

Okla. Stat. tit. 12 § 940 provides, in relevant part, that "[i]n any civil action to recover damages for
the negligent or willful injury to property. . . the prevailing party shall be allowed reasonable attorney's fees."

removal if permitted under state law, and therefore, any attorneys' fee exceeding one dollar,
would suffice for amount in controversy purposes.
The Supreme Court has long held that when a statute permits recovery
of attorney's fees, a reasonable estimate may be used in calculating the
necessary jurisdictional amount in a removal proceeding based upon diversity
of citizenship.” Miera v. Dairyland Ins. Co., 143 F.3d 1337, 1340 (10th
Cir.1998)(citing Missouri State Life Ins. Co. v. Jones, 290 U.S. 199, 202
(1933)).
Salazar v. GEICO Ins. Co., 2010 WL 2292930 (D.N.M. 2010). The Court finds that
anticipating an attorney's fee award in excess of $1.00 should Plaintiffs prevail in this action
is entirely reasonable. Therefore, the facts as set forth in Defendant's Notice of Removal were
sufficient to establish federal jurisdiction, even in light of the presumption against removal
jurisdiction. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' motion to remand is hereby DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of September, 2015.

2