Canterbury et al v. White Pine Insurance Company
Filing
49
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Plaintiff Robert Canterbury's 27 MOTION to Remand. Signed by Judge Frank W. Volk on 6/23/2021. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (btm)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
AT BECKLEY
ROBERT CANTERBURY, owner of
CLC ENTERPRISES, INC.
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-cv-00241
WHITE PINE INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending is Plaintiff Robert Canterbury’s Motion to Remand [Doc. 27]. The matter
is ready for adjudication.
I.
On May 11, 2020, Plaintiff Robert Canterbury instituted this action in the Circuit
Court of Raleigh County, West Virginia, against Defendant White Pine Insurance Company
(“White Pine”). [Doc. 1 at 1]. Mr. Canterbury’s complaint alleged that on November 18, 2015, an
accident occurred involving his tow truck which was insured by White Pine. Mr. Canterbury
asserts an $800 per day loss while the truck was being repaired. [Doc. 28 at 2]. Further, inasmuch
as his policy includes “loss of use” coverage, Mr. Canterbury alleged that his recovery is not
limited to lost profits. [Id. at 4].
On April 7, 2020, White Pine removed the proceeding to the Court based upon
diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. [Doc. 1]. Mr. Canterbury is an individual who
resides in Raleigh County, West Virginia, and White Pine is a corporation “organized under the
laws of the State of Michigan, with a principal place of business Somerset, Pennsylvania.” [Id. at
1]. Additionally, White Pine asserts that the amount in controversy has been met as Mr. Canterbury
seeks (1) compensatory damages of a loss of profits in an amount not less than $70,000, (2)
punitive damages for bad faith in an amount not less than $100,000, (3) pre-judgment interest from
May 2016, (4) post-judgment interest, and (5) litigative costs and attorney fees. [Id.].
On April 19, 2021, Mr. Canterbury filed a Motion to Remand. [Doc. 27]. Mr.
Canterbury alleges that White Pine erroneously removed this case to federal court as White Pine
now contends “that Plaintiff has either suffered a nominal or no loss of profits.” [Id. at 3]. White
Pine acknowledges that a zero sum does not meet the jurisdictional amount necessary for removal.
[Id. at 3].
II.
Federal courts are authorized to exercise diversity jurisdiction “where the matter in
controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Satisfaction of the
amount in controversary is determined based on the record of relief requested up to the time of the
notice of removal being filed. See Atena Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Flowers, 330 U.S. 464, 466 (1947);
see also Wickline v. Dutch Run-Mays Draft, LLC, 606 F. Supp. 2d 633 (S.D. W. Va. 2009). A
plaintiff's good-faith claim for specific monetary damages in the complaint binds the defendant. St.
Paul Mercury Indem. Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 U.S. 283, 288 (1938); Horton v. Liberty Mut. Ins.
Co., 367 U.S. 348, 353 (1961); Heller v. TriEnergy, Inc., 877 F. Supp. 2d 414 (N.D. W. Va. 2012).
Here, Mr. Canterbury’s complaint was the sole recorded pleading at the time
removal was requested. Review of the complaint irrefutably indicates that the amount in
controversy exceeds the jurisdictional amount. Mr. Canterbury’s complaint seeks damages in the
2
amount of at least $70,000 in compensatory damages, and $100,000 in punitive damages. As the
amount in controversy clearly exceeds the $75,000 threshold necessary for diversity jurisdiction,
remand would be improper. The Court has original jurisdiction over this matter.
III.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff Robert Canterbury’s Motion to Remand
[Doc. 27].
The Clerk is directed to send copies of this written opinion and order to all counsel
of record and any unrepresented party.
ENTERED:
3
June 23, 2021
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?