London v. Clements

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[t]he amount in controversy is not what the plaintiff, his lawyer, or some judge thinks a jury would award the plaintiff assuming he prevails on the merits. It is what the plaintiff claims to be entitled to or demands.”
• “[T]he amount in controversy is what the plaintiff claims to be entitled to or demands.”
• “These attributes are particularly important now that fewer complaints contain an ad damnum clause as a result the West Virginia legislature’s adoption of West Virginia Code § 55–7–25.”
• “These attributes are particularly important now that fewer complaints contain an ad damnum clause as a result the West Virginia legislature’s adoption of West Virginia Code § 55-7-25.”
• also see McCoy v. Erie Ins. Co., 147 F.Supp.2d 481, 489 (S.D. W.Va. 2001
• “The amount in controversy is not what the plaintiff, his lawyer, or some judge thinks a jury would award the plaintiff assuming he prevails on the merits. It is what the plaintiff claims to be entitled to or demands.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).