National Consumers League v. Bimbo Bakeries USA

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “district courts of this [C]ircuit have generally adopted” the view that “attorneys’ fees” can satisfy the amount of controversy on a “pro rata basis”
• noting that district courts in this Circuit have “reject[ed] the usual aggregation of statutory attorneys’ fees and include them only on a pro rata basis.”
• noting that district courts in this Circuit have “reject[ed] the usual aggregation of statutory attorneys' fees and include them only on a pro rata basis.”
• explaining that a plaintiff may aggregate the value of multiple claims against a single defendant
• finding that a failure to present evidence for the basis of the attorney’s fees, plaintiff’s attorney’s hours on the suit, rendered the cited attorney’s fees “speculation” and precluded their use in an amount in controversy calculation
• \Defendant's speculation or conclusory statements as to the amount of attorney's fees is insufficient to establish a jurisdictional amount.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).