Arriaga v. Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
- Maxine Chesney
- 3:21-cv-06356
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Arriaga v. Old Republic, Judge Chesney denied Arriaga’s motion to remand because Old Republic showed the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
The ruling affected Brando Arriaga’s request to return the removed action to state court and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company’s opposition to that request.
What happened
In Arriaga v. Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, Brando Arriaga asked the court to send the removed case back to state court. Old Republic opposed the request.
The court found that the required amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction had been shown. Even using Arriaga’s lower estimate of $59,746.17 in compensatory damages, the court found that potential punitive damages and attorney’s fees would more likely than not exceed the additional amount needed to reach $75,000.
The court denied the motion to remand and vacated the scheduled hearing. Judge Maxine M. Chesney decided the motion based on the parties’ written submissions.
The detailed version
- Arriaga v. Old Republic National Title Insurance Company · No. 3:21-cv-06356
- Maxine Chesney
- Oct. 21, 2021
Background
Brando Arriaga filed a motion asking the court to remand, or return, the removed action to state court. Old Republic National Title Insurance Company opposed the motion, and Arriaga filed a reply. The court vacated the hearing scheduled for October 22, 2021, and decided the matter from the parties’ written submissions.
Amount in Controversy
The court addressed whether the amount in controversy satisfied the statutory monetary requirement for diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Arriaga’s complaint approximated his damages at $74,000. In the motion, however, he stated that the compensatory damages he had incurred before filing the action were $59,746.17. The court used the lower figure for its analysis.
The court determined that Old Republic had shown that the amount in controversy was more likely than not greater than $75,000. Although the possible amounts of punitive damages and attorney’s fees could not yet be calculated with certainty, the court found that their combined value was more likely than not greater than $15,253.84—the amount needed to bring the total above $75,000 when added to $59,746.17.
Ruling
Judge Maxine M. Chesney denied Arriaga’s motion to remand. The order did not return the action to state court. The court also vacated the scheduled hearing.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.