Opinion
Civil Action No. 05-0640.
August 12, 2005
RULING ON JURISDICTIONAL AMOUNT
This diversity case was filed directly in federal court, under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. On July 21, 2005, the undersigned issued an order requiring plaintiff to file a memorandum with supporting documentation setting forth specific facts in controversy which supported a finding that the jurisdictional amount exists. Before the court is plaintiff's memorandum regarding jurisdictional amount. Defendants have not responded to plaintiff's memorandum.
Having reviewed plaintiff's memorandum and the exhibits thereto, I conclude that plaintiff has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 by setting forth the specific facts in controversy that support a finding of the jurisdictional amount. Simon v. Wal Mart Stores, 193 F.3d 848 (5th Cir. 1999); Luckett v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 171 F.3d 295 (5th Cir. 1999). Relevant jurisdictional facts which have been provided include that plaintiff alleges that she slipped on a liquid substance while in defendants' restaurant. As a result of the fall, plaintiff suffered a radial head fracture of the right elbow, injury to her right shoulder, and injuries to the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine. Plaintiff sets forth that her medical expenses are approximately $18,290.00, and that she has been treated continuously since the date of the accident for her injuries. Plaintiff also cites cases wherein plaintiffs with injuries similar to hers were awarded from $60,000.00 to $400,000.00 in general damages.
Rec. Doc. 1.
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned concludes that the jurisdictional amount has been established and an order of remand would not be appropriate.