Case Brief Civ Pro Unit B1 amount in question 1 17 15 Identity of Case Diefenthal v C A B 681 F 2d 1039 5th Cir 1982 Page 74 of the casebook Summary of Facts Procedural History Plaintiffs appellants were passengers on board a plane They purchased first class smoking tickets There was an error in booking and they were sat in first class instead and not allowed to smoke 1 st complaint included a contract claim and a tort claim for 10 000 an amount that would meet the minimum req for diversity jurisdiction at the time Defendant motioned to dismiss for lack of diversity jurisdiction as they and the court agreed could not conceive by the wildest stretch of the imagination how there could be 10 000 damage on the basis of what plaintiffs allege Plaintiffs were allowed to amend their complaint and did so using stronger language but alleging basically the same facts Jurisdiction denied Statement of the Issue On what basis is the validity of the cited amount in dispute to be determined Holding As long as the plaintiff s allege an amount in dispute in good faith the amount will be accepted But if there is no conceivable way that the actions complained upon could amount to the damages cited this can be taken as evidence of bad faith Reasoning See rule Basically it doesn t matter what the actual damages are it matters howmuch the plaintiffs think they are in good faith and if the plaintiffs are reasonable Evaluation
View Full Document
Unlocking...