Moattar v. Progressive Direct Insurance Company
2:25-cv-00660
W.D. Wash.Jun 9, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Ron Moattar was involved in a car accident on February 25, 2022, when his vehicle was rear-ended by an uninsured driver, Yoon Lee.
- Lee was cited for following too closely, and Moattar suffered injuries as a result of the accident.
- At the time, Moattar was insured by Progressive Direct Insurance Company, the defendant in this case.
- Moattar filed a complaint in state court but did not specify a dollar amount of damages in his pleading.
- Progressive removed the case to federal court, citing a pre-suit settlement demand from Moattar of $31,139.58 in special damages, claiming the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 when including general damages.
- Moattar moved to remand the case to state court, arguing Progressive did not meet its burden to show that the amount in controversy crossed the federal $75,000 threshold; Progressive did not oppose this motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether federal diversity jurisdiction exists | Amount in controversy is under $75,000; remand proper | Claimed amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 | Amount in controversy not met; remanded |
| Whether motion to remand should be granted | Removal unsupported; fails to prove jurisdiction | No opposition | Motion to remand granted |
| Burden of proof in removal | Defendant must prove amount in controversy by evidence | No substantive evidence provided | Defendant failed to meet burden |
| Standard for resolving doubt in removability | Doubt must be resolved in favor of remand | No opposition filed | Doubts resolved in favor of remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (federal courts must independently verify subject-matter jurisdiction)
- Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574 (without jurisdiction, court has no authority to proceed)
- Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564 (strong presumption against removal; defendant bears burden)
- Cal. ex rel. Lockyer v. Dynegy, Inc., 375 F.3d 831 (remand required if subject-matter jurisdiction lost)
- Matheson v. Progressive Specialty Ins. Co., 319 F.3d 1089 (doubts about removability resolved in favor of remand)
- Abrego Abrego v. The Dow Chem. Co., 443 F.3d 676 (defendant must prove amount in controversy by preponderance of evidence)