Shannon Leonard v. Enterprise Rent A Car

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 value of the injunctive relief in question was too speculative to include in the amount in controversy
• holding that the value of the injunctive relief in question was too speculative to include in the amount in controversy
• holding that “unsupported assumptions” are “inadequate” to prove that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000
• recognizing that dismissal is proper “where the pleadings make it clear to a legal certainty that the claim is really for less than the jurisdictional amount”
• holding that a Rule 12(b)(6) motion filed after answering the complaint was a “nullity . . . by filing an answer, the defendants had eschewed the option of asserting by motion that the complaint failed to state a claim for relief”
• noting that by first filing an answer to the complaint, the defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) “motions were a nullity”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).