Opinion
Case No. CV 15-07066 DDP (AFMx)
09-23-2016
GEORGE MUTASCU, Plaintiff, v. EMIL BOTEZATU, Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY
The parties are ordered to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
District courts have diversity jurisdiction over all civil suits where the amount in controversy "exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens of different States." 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). "If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
Here, Plaintiff's Complaint alleges that damages amount to $110,000. (See Complaint Damages.) Specifically, Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages "in excess of $10,000.00 and according to proof" and "punitive damages in excess of $100,000.00 and according to proof." Plaintiff bases this request on his allegation that Defendant vandalized an automobile used by Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 12.)
"It is well established that punitive damages are part of the amount in controversy in a civil action." Gibson v. Chrysler Corp., 261 F.3d 927, 945 (9th Cir. 2001) (cit ing Bell v. Preferred Life Assur. Society, 320 U.S. 238, 240 (1943)). However, "Defendant's burden cannot be met simply by pointing out that the complaint seeks punitive damages and that any damages awarded under such a claim could total a large sum of money." Conrad Associates v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., 994 F. Supp. 1196, 1201 (N.D. Cal. 1998); see also Haisch v. Allstate Ins. Co., 942 F. Supp. 1245, 1249 (D. Ariz. 1996). Rather, the court must conclude that a preponderance of evidence demonstrates that the punitive damages award could adequately increase the amount in controversy to meet the jurisdictional minimum. See Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566-67 (9th Cir. 2002)("If it is unclear what amount of damages the plaintiff has sought, . . . then the defendant bears the burden of actually proving the facts to support jurisdiction, including the jurisdictional amount."
In the present case, the court has doubts that Plaintiff's claims satisfy the amount in controversy requirement. Even assuming that damage to Plaintiff's car amounted to $10,000, the Complaint does not allege any facts that would make plausible a punitive damage award ten times that amount.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff is ordered to file a brief, not to exceed five pages, within fourteen days of the date of this Order, showing why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff's failure to file a brief in accordance with this Order will be deemed consent to dismissal of this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 23, 2016
/s/
DEAN D. PREGERSON
United States District Judge