Gwyn v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a mere claim for punitive and compensatory damages in excess of $10,000 is speculative
• concluding that the removing defendant failed to meet its “evidentiary burden” where its proffer of amount in controversy “[wa]s based on speculation, not fact”
• stating that the Fourth Circuit has not adopted a specific rule for determining the amount in controversy for jurisdictional purposes
• noting that the plaintiff’s stipulation is “simply the first evidence of the value of the claim”
• finding that the plaintiff’s post-removal stipulation was the “first evidence of the value of the claim”
• stating that “[i]n trying to settle a claim, counsel naturally will try to inflate its value. Such ‘puffing’ cannot be taken as evidence of the amount in controversy.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).