Cantrell v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
4:11-cv-00837
| E.D. Tex. | Apr 4, 2012Background
- Cantrells sue Wells Fargo Bank in the Eastern District of Texas (Sherman Division).
- Plaintiffs moved to remand, arguing lack of sufficient jurisdictional amount.
- Defendant removed based on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and claimed >$75,000 in controversy.
- Plaintiffs’ petition seeks injunctive relief, declaratory relief, actual and out-of-pocket damages, mental anguish, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees.
- Court finds, based on the property value and additional damages, that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, and remand is not required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 | Cantrells contend the amount is not proven to exceed $75k | Wells Fargo contends property value and damages push the amount over $75k | Yes; amount in controversy exceeds $75k |
| Whether removal was proper given the amount in controversy | Remand should be granted due to insufficient proof | Removal is proper as the claim likely exceeds $75k based on property value and damages | Removal proper; jurisdictional threshold met |
| Whether attorney’s fees and punitive damages can be counted toward the amount in controversy | Damages include distinct non-pecuniary and attorney’s fees | Fees and exemplary damages may be considered in calculating amount in controversy | Yes; fees and exemplary damages can be considered in determining amount in controversy |
Key Cases Cited
- Garcia v. Koch Oil Co. of Texas, Inc., 351 F.3d 636 (5th Cir. 2003) (burden on defendant to show jurisdiction; preponderance standard)
- In re Hot-Hed Inc., 477 F.3d 320 (5th Cir. 2007) (strictly construe removal statute in favor of remand)
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375 (U.S. 1994) (court must dismiss if no subject-matter jurisdiction)
- Howery v. Allstate Ins. Co., 243 F.3d 912 (5th Cir. 2001) (limits on removal and jurisdictional challenges)
- Corley v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 924 F. Supp. 782 (E.D. Tex. 1996) (independent appraisal of amount in controversy)
- Martinez v. BAC Home Loans Servs., LP, 777 F. Supp. 2d 1039 (W.D. Tex. 2010) (property value can determine amount in controversy in foreclosure context)
- Century Assets Corp. v. Solow, 88 F. Supp. 2d 659 (E.D. Tex. 2000) (fees and exemplary damages considered for amount in controversy)
- Bell v. Preferred Life Assur. Soc., 320 U.S. 238 (1943) (limitations on damages subtracting from jurisdictional amount)
- In re Abbott Labs., 51 F.3d 524 (5th Cir. 1995) (cited for inclusion of various damages in amount in controversy)
- U.S. Fire Ins. Co. v. Villegas, 242 F.3d 279 (5th Cir. 2001) (attorney’s fees and punitive damages may be considered)