Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kathi Jo Patterson v. Lowe's Hiw

February 3, 2012

KATHI JO PATTERSON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
LOWE'S HIW, INC.; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10 DEFENDANTS.



(San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No.: CIVRS 1104756)

REMAND ORDER

I. BACKGROUND

On May 10, 2011, Plaintiff KATHI JO PATTERSON ("Plaintiff") commenced the above-entitled civil action in the Superior Court for the County of San Bernardino by filing a Complaint therein entitled Kathi Jo Patterson v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc., Lowe's Home Improvement and DOES 1 to 10 , Case No. CIVRS 1104756.

Plaintiff's complaint for negligence/premises liability arises out of an alleged incident that took place on May 16, 2009, while Plaintiff was shopping in Defendant LOWE'S HIW, INC.'s ("defendant") retail store located in Chino Hills, California. On that date, Plaintiff claims she was injured when a rack of trellises allegedly fell on her.

Because California courts prohibit the inclusion of ad damnun clauses in complaints for personal injuries, Plaintiff served a Statement of Damages pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 425.11. After Plaintiff submitted a Statement of Damages in excess of $75,000, defendant removed the matter to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441.

The parties have now agreed and stipulated to limit any and all recovery of damages by Plaintiff KATHI JO PATTERSON in this matter at $75,000 or less, as evidenced by the Stipulation Capping Plaintiff's Damages and Recovery at $75,000, executed by both Plaintiff and her counsel. Accordingly, the parties seek an order from this Court remanding the case to the Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, Case No. CIVRS 1104756.

II. ANALYSIS

United States Code, Title 28, Section 1447(c), provides that "[i]f at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded ." (Emphasis added). In light of the parties' stipulation limiting any and all recovery by Plaintiff KATHI JO PATTERSON to $75,000 or less, this Court to lacks subject matter jurisdiction and must, therefore, remand the case to state court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). See Bruns v. NCUA 122 F.3d 1251, 1257 (9 th Cir. 1997) ("Section 1447(c) is mandatory, not discretionary.")

III. CONCLUSION

Because the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction in the present case. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, Case No. CIVRS 1104756.

SO ORDERED this _3rd____ day of February, 2012.

United States District Court Judge

Submitted By: THARPE & HOWELL, LLP By: CHARLES D. MAY GENE B. SHARAGA STEVE PYUN Attorneys for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.