44 Cited authorities

  1. Hertz Corp. v. Friend

    559 U.S. 77 (2010)   Cited 3,634 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a corporation's principal place of business is “the place where a corporation's officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation's activities”
  2. Murphy Brothers, Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing

    526 U.S. 344 (1999)   Cited 2,235 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendant's informal receipt of the complaint did not start the time for filing
  3. Matheson v. Progressive Specialty Ins. Co.

    319 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,339 times
    Holding that it was not facially evident from the complaint that the controversy involved more than $75,000 where the plaintiff sought "'in excess' of $10,000 for economic loss, 'in excess' of $10,000 for emotional distress, and 'in excess' of $10,000 for punitive damages"
  4. Kanter v. Warner-Lambert Co.

    265 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 1,217 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that remand for defective diversity allegations was unreviewable even though the removing defendant "could potentially have cured its defective allegations regarding citizenship by amending its notice of removal"
  5. Valdez v. Allstate Ins. Co.

    372 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 1,054 times
    Holding that a defendant must carry its burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 because plaintiff's complaint “[fell] short of even seeking the threshold amount”
  6. Sanchez v. Monumental Life Ins. Co

    102 F.3d 398 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 1,199 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants bears the burden to show that removal is proper
  7. Singer v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

    116 F.3d 373 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 946 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiff's admission in open court established amount in controversy
  8. Lewis v. Verizon Communications

    627 F.3d 395 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 323 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party "need not concede liability" to remove a case to federal court under CAFA.
  9. Lew v. Moss

    797 F.2d 747 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 626 times
    Holding that the party asserting diversity jurisdiction bears the burden of proof.
  10. Kroske v. U.S. Bank Corp.

    432 F.3d 976 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 326 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court properly considered awards in similar cases when determining the amount in controversy
  11. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 106,059 times   570 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"
  12. Section 1441 - Removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1441   Cited 47,962 times   146 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[a]ny civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the ... laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties.”
  13. Rule 59 - New Trial; Altering or Amending a Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 59   Cited 41,608 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Allowing motion to alter or amend judgment
  14. Section 1446 - Procedure for removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1446   Cited 20,666 times   140 Legal Analyses
    Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim
  15. Section 3294 - When damages recoverable for sake of example and by way of punishment; employer liability for acts of employee; death from homicide

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3294   Cited 2,654 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Stating plaintiff may recover punitive damages "in addition to the actual damages"
  16. Section 12900 - Short title

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12900   Cited 2,104 times   9 Legal Analyses

    This part may be known and referred to as the "California Fair Employment and Housing Act." Ca. Gov. Code § 12900 Amended by Stats 2022 ch 48 (SB 189),s 29, eff. 6/30/2022(amended Part heading). Added by Stats. 1980, Ch. 992.

  17. Section 335.1 - Assault, battery or injury or death caused by wrongful act or negligence

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 335.1   Cited 2,048 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Imposing two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims
  18. Section 337 - Contract, obligation or liability founded upon written instrument; book account; rescission of contract

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 337   Cited 1,618 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Governing rescissions of written contracts
  19. Section 340 - Penalty or forfeiture; libel, slander, false imprisonment, seduction, payment on forged check, neglect of animal; officer seizing property; good faith improver

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 340   Cited 1,483 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Providing a one-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims arising prior to January 1, 2003
  20. Section 339 - Contract, obligation not founded on written instrument; against sheriff or coroner for doing official act; rescission of contract not in writing

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 339   Cited 1,454 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff must initiate within two years "[a]n action upon a contract, obligation or liability not founded upon an instrument of writing"
  21. Rule 2.30 - Sanctions for rules violations in civil cases

    Cal. R. 2.30   Cited 31 times

    (a) Application This sanctions rule applies to the rules in the California Rules of Court relating to general civil cases, unlawful detainer cases, probate proceedings, civil proceedings in the appellate division of the superior court, and small claims cases. (b) Sanctions In addition to any other sanctions permitted by law, the court may order a person, after written notice and an opportunity to be heard, to pay reasonable monetary sanctions to the court or an aggrieved person, or both, for failure

  22. Rule 3.400 - Definition

    Cal. R. 3.400   Cited 30 times

    (a) Definition A "complex case" is an action that requires exceptional judicial management to avoid placing unnecessary burdens on the court or the litigants and to expedite the case, keep costs reasonable, and promote effective decision making by the court, the parties, and counsel. (b) Factors In deciding whether an action is a complex case under (a), the court must consider, among other things, whether the action is likely to involve: (1) Numerous pretrial motions raising difficult or novel legal

  23. Rule 3.220 - Case cover sheet

    Cal. R. 3.220   Cited 10 times

    (a) Cover sheet required The first paper filed in an action or proceeding must be accompanied by a case cover sheet as required in (b). The cover sheet must be on a form prescribed by the Judicial Council and must be filed in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule. If the plaintiff indicates on the cover sheet that the case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. or a collections case under rule 3.740, the plaintiff must serve a copy of the cover sheet with the complaint. In all other

  24. Rule 3.740 - Collections cases

    Cal. R. 3.740   Cited 4 times

    (a) Definition "Collections case" means an action for recovery of money owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney fees, arising from a transaction in which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking any of the following: (1) Tort damages; (2) Punitive damages; (3) Recovery of real property; (4) Recovery of personal property; or (5) A prejudgment writ of attachment. (b) Civil

  25. Rule 3.402 - Complex case counterdesignations

    Cal. R. 3.402   Cited 1 times

    (a) Noncomplex counterdesignation If a Civil Case Cover Sheet (form CM-010) designating an action as a complex case has been filed and served and the court has not previously declared the action to be a complex case, a defendant may file and serve no later than its first appearance a counter Civil Case Cover Sheet (form CM-010) designating the action as not a complex case. The court must decide, with or without a hearing, whether the action is a complex case within 30 days after the filing of the