Richard M. Sanchez v. Monumental Life Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the amount in controversy requirement cannot be fulfilled by the mere possibility of recovery above the jurisdictional amount
• concluding that the amount-in-controversy requirement went unsatisfied and thus “va-cat[ing] the district court’s judgment and remand[ing] the case to the district court with instructions to enter an order remanding the case to state court”
• observing that a preponderance of the evidence 27 means “it is ‘more likely than not’ that the amount in controversy exceeds” the jurisdictional 28 threshold.
• observing that the “defendant must provide evidence establishing that it is ‘more likely than not’ that the amount in controversy exceeds that amount”
• observing that a preponderance of the evidence 20 means “it is ‘more likely than not’ that the amount in controversy exceeds” the jurisdictional 21 threshold.
• noting that the removing 27 defendant faces a strong presumption against removal and bears the burden of establishing that 28 removal is proper

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).