Dieguez v. LM General Insurance Company

Middle District of Florida, flmd-8:2016-cv-00760

ORDER: Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Notice of Removal and Remand to State Court {{5}}, which this Court construes as a Motion to Remand, is DENIED. Signed by Judge James S. Moody, Jr on 4/13/2016. (LN)

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

PageID 158 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION ANA DIEGUEZ, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 8:16-cv-760-T-30EAJ LM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's "Response to Defendant's Notice of Removal and Remand to State Court" (Dkt. #5), which this Court construes as a Motion to Remand, and Defendant's Reply thereto (Dkt. #8). Upon review and consideration, the Court concludes that Plaintiff's request to remand this case is without merit. Plaintiff's terse argument in favor of remand is unpersuasive; Plaintiff simply states that the amount in controversy is not met. But this argument ignores Plaintiff's Civil Remedy Notice that indicates that Plaintiff's damages are $182,500 "in addition to her medical bills and past lost wages." (Dkt. #1 at 39-41). Plaintiff's pre-suit demand letter also describes Plaintiff's damages as $182,500 "in addition to her medical bills and past lost wages." (Dkt. #1 at 91-92). Notably, Plaintiff also requests attorney's fees and seeks damages related to a bad faith claim. Accordingly, the amount in controversy clearly exceeded $75,000 at the time of removal. It is therefore PageID 159 ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: 1. Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Notice of Removal and Remand to State Court (Dkt. #5), which this Court construes as a Motion to Remand, is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 13th day of April, 2016. Copies furnished to: Counsel/Parties of Record S:\Even\2016\16-cv-760 remand 5.docx 2