Summary
finding it reasonable to infer from allegations of bad faith and damages in excess of the policy limits that the plaintiff was seeking damages up to the policy limits for the uninsured motorist benefits claim
Summary of this case from Williams v. LM Gen. Ins. Co.Opinion
Case No: 6:13-cv-1502-Orl-36KRS
11-26-2013
ANGELINE WILT, Plaintiff, v. DEPOSITORS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding, filed on November 6, 2013 (Doc. 24). In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff Angeline Wilt's ("Plaintiff") Motion for Remand ("Motion for Remand") (Doc. 15) be denied. See Doc. 24. Neither party has objected to the Report and Recommendation and the time to do so has expired.
The Court is in agreement with the Magistrate Judge that Plaintiff's Motion for Remand should be denied because Defendant Depositors Insurance Company has met its burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. See id. Based on the allegations in paragraphs 15 and 20 of the Complaint (Doc. 2), the Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violations attached to the Complaint (Doc. 2-1, pp. 52-54), and the "reasonable deductions, reasonable inferences [and] reasonable extrapolations" therefrom, it is facially apparent from the Complaint that Plaintiff is seeking remaining policy limits which are well in excess of $75,000. Roe v. Michelin N. Am., Inc., 613 F.3d 1058, 1061- 62 (11th Cir. 2010) (permitting district courts to make reasonable deductions, reasonable inferences, or other reasonable extrapolations from the pleadings to determine whether it is facially apparent that a case is removable). Therefore, after careful consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, in conjunction with an independent examination of the court file, the Court is of the opinion that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects.
The Magistrate Judge also correctly noted that although settlement demand letters, standing alone, do not automatically establish the amount in controversy, see Lamb v. State Farm Fire Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 3:10-cv-615, 2010 WL 6790539, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 5, 2010), the settlement demand letters here provide sufficient information to support the notion that Plaintiff is seeking in excess of the jurisdictional minimum. See Doc. 24, p. 14 n.11 (citing Doc. 15, pp. 21-24 (demand letter from Plaintiff detailing medical bills in excess of $58,500, expected cost of surgery of around $100,000, and expected future care of around $5,000 annually)).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 24) is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and is made a part of this Order for all purposes, including appellate review.
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Remand (Doc. 15) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on November 26, 2013.
______________________
Charlene Edwards Honeywell
United States District Judge
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record
Unrepresented Parties
United States Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding