Jackson v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a $155,000 settlement demand was insufficient to support removal, because it did not include information to support the amount demanded
• explaining that a demand for a lump sum amount “without the slightest suggestion how in the world the plaintiff[] could support such a figure,” is considered nothing more than mere posturing
• distinguishing between settlement offers that “reflect puffing and posturing” from those that provide specific information to suggest that the letter offers a reasonable assessment of the value of the claim
• A settlement offer has “little weight” in the amount-in- controversy calculus when it merely “reflect[s] puffing and posturing.”
• A settlement offer has “little weight” in the amount-in-controversy calculus when it merely “reflect[s] puffing and posturing”
• A settlement offer has “little weight” in the amount-in-controversy calculus when it merely “reflect[s] puffing and posturing”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).