Blockbuster, Inc. v. Michael Galeno, Docket No. 05-8019-Cv

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “CAFA did not change the traditional rule and that plaintiff bears the burden of establishing federal subject matter jurisdiction.”
• holding that a party need only show “to a reasonable probability” that the aggregate claims exceed $5 million
• holding that the party asserting CAFA jurisdiction must demonstrate a “reasonable probability” that the jurisdictional requirements are satisfied
• holding that in removal actions “defendant bears the burden of establishing federal subject matter jurisdiction”
• holding that “CAFA did not change the traditional rule . . . that defendant bears the burden of establishing federal subject matter jurisdiction” after removal
• holding that the court could presume that at least one class member was domiciled in New York for purposes of minimal diversity where the complaint “stated that there were ‘thousands’ of ‘New York customers’ who were members of the class”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).