Willard J. Rosenboro v. Dr. Andrew Kim

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that by raising the amount-in-controversy requirement, Congress has increased the burden that plaintiffs bear
• stating that “the claims of multiple plaintiffs may not be aggregated” to satisfy the amount-of-controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction
• Concluding to a legal certainty that the plaintiff's claim did not satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement, because of a \total lack of medical findings\ supporting her alleged injuries
• explaining that a party claiming diversity jurisdiction “must produce evidence supporting a legal uncertainty about whether she could prove” that her damages exceed the jurisdictional threshold
• Concluding to a legal certainty that the plaintiff’s claim did not satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement, because of a “total lack of medical findings” supporting her alleged injuries
• “Estimating the maximum potential value of unliquidated damage claims is an inexact science at best.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).