§Why CasetextPricing

Paz v. Playtex Products, Inc. et al

REPLY re MOTION to Remand to State Court

16 Cited authorities

  1. Gaus v. Miles, Inc.

    980 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1992)   Cited 10,505 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a conclusory allegation "neither overcomes the 'strong presumption' against removal jurisdiction, nor satisfies [the defendant]'s burden of setting forth, in the removal petition itself, the underlying facts supporting its assertion that the amount in controversy exceeds" the applicable dollar value

  2. Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

    29 Cal.4th 1134 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 1,705 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff cannot recover damages under Cal. Bus. Prof. Code § 17200 unless plaintiff has "an ownership interest in the money it seeks to recover"

  3. Sanchez v. Monumental Life Ins. Co

    102 F.3d 398 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 1,404 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants bears the burden to show that removal is proper

  4. Lowdermilk v. U.S. Bank

    479 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 802 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that damage waivers were valid and effective unless the defendant could prove to a "legal certainty" that damages exceeded $5,000,000

  5. Singer v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

    116 F.3d 373 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 1,133 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiff's admission in open court established amount in controversy

  6. IN RE FORD MOTOR CO./CITIBANK, N.A.

    264 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 701 times
    Holding that “the amount in controversy requirement cannot be satisfied by showing that the fixed administrative costs of compliance exceed $ 75,000” because to hold otherwise would be “fundamentally violative of the principle underlying the jurisdictional amount requirement—to keep small diversity suits out of federal court”

  7. Serrano v. 180 Connect, Inc.

    478 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 332 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that CAFA exceptions are nonjurisdictional because they "require federal courts—although they have jurisdiction ... to ‘decline to exercise jurisdiction ’ when" CAFA's threshold requirements are met

  8. Colgan v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.

    135 Cal.App.4th 663 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 321 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal cases requiring “'extrinsic evidence,' such as expert testimony or consumer surveys...do not accurately reflect California law.”

  9. In re Brand Name Prescription Drugs

    123 F.3d 599 (7th Cir. 1997)   Cited 339 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in injunction case, the defendant's cost of compliance with the injunction can be added to meet the minimum amount in controversy

  10. Snow v. Ford Motor Co.

    561 F.2d 787 (9th Cir. 1977)   Cited 179 times
    Holding that the equitable relief sought by a class may not be aggregated where each class member's claim is separate and distinct

  11. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 115,854 times   572 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 1447 - Procedure after removal generally

    28 U.S.C. § 1447   Cited 34,295 times   110 Legal Analyses
    Holding that with exceptions not relevant here, "[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise"

  13. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 18,412 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  14. Section 17203 - Injunctive relief

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17203   Cited 1,015 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that an individual plead that she lost "money or property" because of the alleged deceptive conduct