Charlotte Phillips v. Wellpoint Incorporated

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a CAFA exception “concerns whether the court exercises jurisdiction to the full, not whether jurisdiction exists”
• noting “plaintiffs needed to produce some evidence that would allow the court to determine the class members’ citizenships on the date the case was removed”
• permitting plaintiffs to take a random sample of potential class members for ascertaining the citizenship of each member
• indicating that CAFA abstention decisions can be made via sampling
• noting “plaintiffs needed to produce some evidence that would allow the court to determine the class members’ citizenships on the date the case was removed”
• explaining that a putative class plaintiff might replace guesswork with statistical evidence by “tak[ing] a random sample of policyholders (100, say), ascertain the citizenship of each of these on the date the case was removed, and extrapolate to the class as a whole”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).