Brown's Auto Sales RVs and Campers Inc v. Spevey
4:12-cv-02334
D.S.C.Aug 22, 2012Background
- This case was removed from the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas to federal court under 28 U.S.C. §§1441 and 1446 on the basis of diversity jurisdiction.
- Plaintiff Brown’s Auto Sales, RVs, and Campers, Inc. alleged a dispute with defendants Carl Spevey, Melveee Spevey, and North Carolina Grange Mutual Insurance Company.
- The amount in controversy and the existence of complete diversity were not clearly established in the complaint or removal notice.
- The court issued a show-cause order to determine whether jurisdiction existed and whether the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
- On August 21, 2012, Plaintiff, with Defendants’ consent, irrevocably stipulated that the amount in controversy at the time of filing was no more than $74,999.00.
- The court remanded the case to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas for Chesterfield County.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether removal was proper given unclear amount in controversy. | Brown's Auto Sales contends the amount is unclear and may not meet the $75,000 threshold. | Spevey asserts potential for a larger amount in controversy supports removal. | Remand ordered; jurisdiction not established. |
| Whether the stipulation fixing the amount in controversy binds the court to remand. | Brown's Auto Sales argues the stipulation fixes the amount at $74,999. | Defendants contend the stipulation confirms lack of jurisdiction. | Remand sustained based on the stipulation showing no jurisdictional amount. |
| Whether the court should narrowly construe removal jurisdiction and remand where doubts exist. | Remand for lack of clear jurisdiction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Shamrock Oil & Gas Co. v. Sheets, 313 U.S. 100 (U.S. 1941) (doubts resolve in favor of remand; strict construction of removal jurisdiction)
- St. Paul Mercury Indem. Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 U.S. 283 (U.S. 1938) (amount in controversy determined by plaintiff's claim to be controlling)
- JTH Tax, Inc. v. Frashier, 624 F.3d 635 (4th Cir. 2010) (‘sum claimed by the plaintiff controls’ the amount in controversy)
- Wiggins v. N. Am. Equitable Life Assurance Co., 644 F.2d 1014 (4th Cir. 1981) (jurisdictional amount ordinarily determined by plaintiff's original claim in good faith)
- In re Blackwater Security Consulting, LLC, 460 F.3d 576 (4th Cir. 2006) (removeability must be strictly construed; federalism concerns emphasized)
- Marshall v. Manville Sales Corp., 6 F.3d 229 (4th Cir. 1993) (doubts resolved in favor of remand; jurisdiction scrutinized)
- Mulcahey v. Columbia Organic Chems. Co., Inc., 29 F.3d 148 (4th Cir. 1994) (federal jurisdiction reviewed narrowly to avoid improper removal)