Case BriefCiv Pro Unit B1 (amount in question)1/17/15Identity of CaseDiefenthal v. C.A.B., 681 F.2d 1039 (5th Cir. 1982)Page 74 of the casebookSummary of Facts /Procedural HistoryPlaintiffs/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. 1st 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 IssueOn what basis is the validity of the cited amount in dispute to be determined? HoldingAs 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. ReasoningSee rule. Basically it doesn’t matter what the actual damages are, it matters howmuch the plaintiffs thinkthey are, in good faith, and if the plaintiffs are reasonable.
View Full Document
Unlocking...