ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Class Action Blogs -> CAFA Law Blog - Information, cases and insights regarding the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Class Action

: CAFA Law Blog - Information, cases and insights regarding the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005

Short Case From Small State! Rhode Island Handles CAFA Amount in Controversy Standard.

ADVERTISEMENTS

Gayvont v. Davol, Inc., No. 07-1966ML; MDL 07-1842ML; 2008 WL 2433258 (D. R.I. Feb. 6, 2008).

Inspired by Judge Lisi’s economy of words, the editors hereby resolve to keep this post shorter than the opinion it summarizes….

In the absence of guidance from the First Circuit, the District of RhodeIsland recently followed the majority approach from other courts across the country for determining whether proof of the amount in controversy is sufficient to support an assertion of diversity jurisdiction under CAFA’s requirement that there be an aggregate amount in controversy of $5,000,000. 

This approach requires the party asserting jurisdiction (here, as usual, the removing defendants) to establish the amount in controversy by only a preponderance of the evidence. The court recognized that some courts have applied an even more lenient standard, citing the 9th circuit’s “more likely than not” standard articulated in Abrego v. Dow Chemical Co. (Editors’ Note: See the CAFA Law Blog analysis of Abrego posted on May 25, 2006) and the 7th Circuit’s “reasonable probability” standard from Brill v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (Editors’ Note: See the CAFA Law Blog analysis of Brill posted on November 2, 2005) . 

The District of Rhode Island rejected the minority rule that requires the amount in controversy to be established “to a legal certainty.” The court reasoned that the less stringent standard is consistent with the purpose behind CAFA to widen the scope of federal jurisdiction for class actions, citing to the Senate Judiciary Committee report.

Full post as published by CAFA Law Blog - Information, cases and insights regarding the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 on September 09, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0036 secs (from cache 10/31/26 20:04:21)