Angilau v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the amount in controversy is based on what the plaintiff seeks
• remanding to district court to determine whether other exceptions to jurisdiction under CAFA apply where district court had not reached such arguments
• declining to reach issues not addressed by the district court in the first instance
• “The required ‘demonstration concerns what the plaintiff is claiming (and thus the amount in controversy between the parties
• “CAFA expanded federal district courts’ original jurisdiction to include ‘“class actions” and “mass actions”’ in which there is minimal diversity and the aggregate amount in controversy exceeds $5 million.”
• “[T]hat the removing party bears the burden of proving the amount in controversy does not mean that the removing party cannot ask the court to make common-sense inferences about the amount put at stake by the injuries the plaintiffs claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).