Grant Fritsch v. Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC et al
Grant Fritsch |
Does, Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC, Swift Transportation Company and Swift Transportation Services, LLC |
5:2017cv02226 |
October 31, 2017 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Jesus G. Bernal |
Sheri Pym |
Other |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 113 JUDGMENT by Judge Virginia A. Phillips. JUDGMENT is entered in this action as follows: Plaintiffs Grant Fritsch, Bill Barker, Tab Bachman and William Yingling, the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency, and certified class. IT IS SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED. (See document for further details) (yl) |
Filing 21 MINUTE Order (1) GRANTING Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Dkt. No. 14 ); (2) REMANDING the case to state court; and (3) VACATING the December 11, 2017 Hearing (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Jesus G. Bernal. (SEE ORDER FOR FURTHER DETAILS). In sum, the Court finds Defendant has proven the amount in controversy is approximately $4,778,575, which does not exceed the jurisdictional minimum. Thus, the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion and REMANDS the action to state court. (Case Remanded to San Bernardino County Superior Court, CIVDS81518012. MD JS-6. Case Terminated.) (iva) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.