Ragle v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.
Plaintiff: Michael Ragle
Defendant: Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.
Case Number: 8:2019cv01259
Filed: May 22, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Presiding Judge: Virginia M Hernandez Covington
Referring Judge: Thomas G Wilson
Nature of Suit: Tort Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1446pl
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 19, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
June 19, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER: Because the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the Clerk is directed to REMAND this case to state court and, thereafter, CLOSE this case. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 6/19/2019. (DMD)
June 17, 2019 Filing 11 CASE MANAGEMENT REPORT. (East, Joleen)
June 3, 2019 Filing 10 NOTICE of pendency of related cases re #4 Related case order and track 2 notice per Local Rule 1.04(d) by Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc. Related case(s): no (East, Joleen) Modified text on 6/4/2019 (JCG).
June 1, 2019 Filing 9 NOTICE of pendency of related cases re #4 Related case order and track 2 notice per Local Rule 1.04(d) by Michael Ragle. Related case(s): no (Rotstein, Jonathan)
June 1, 2019 Filing 8 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement re #5 Certificate of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by Michael Ragle. (Rotstein, Jonathan)
May 31, 2019 Filing 7 RESPONSE re 3 Order by Michael Ragle. (Rotstein, Jonathan)
May 29, 2019 Filing 6 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 3 Order filed by Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(East, Joleen)
May 29, 2019 Filing 5 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc. identifying Corporate Parent Stanley Black & Decker, Inc., Other Affiliate Black & Decker Inc., Other Affiliate The Black & Decker Corporation for Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc. (East, Joleen)
May 27, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 4 RELATED CASE ORDER AND NOTICE of designation under Local Rule 3.05 - track 2. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 5/27/2019. (TWL)
May 23, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ENDORSED ORDER: Defendant removed this products liability case on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. But the Amended Complaint does not specify the amount of damages at issue. When "damages are unspecified, the removing party bears the burden of establishing the jurisdictional amount by a preponderance of the evidence." Lowery v. Ala. Power Co., 483 F.3d 1184, 1208 (11th Cir. 2007). In the notice of removal, Defendant bases its argument that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 solely upon an admission by Plaintiff that he is seeking over $75,000 in damages. (Doc. #1 at 2). "However, a plaintiff's mere concession that the amount-in-controversy exceeds $75,000 is insufficient because '[j]urisdictional objections cannot be forfeited or waived.'" Eckert v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., No. 8:13-cv-2599-T-23EAJ, 2013 WL 5673511, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 17, 2013)(citation omitted)(remanding removed action where defendant solely relied on plaintiff's admission to amount in controversy). And Defendant does not provide additional information to support that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, such as Plaintiff's medical expenses. Therefore, at this juncture, the Court is not persuaded that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Accordingly, Defendant is directed to provide more information establishing by a preponderance of the evidence, if possible, that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 by May 30, 2019. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 5/23/2019. (DMD)
May 22, 2019 Filing 2 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington and Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson. New case number: 8:19-cv-1259-T-33TGW. (SJB)
May 22, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT and NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Pinellas County Circuit Civil, case number 18-008393-CI filed in State Court on 12/21/18. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 113A-15493586 filed by Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-State Court Amended Complaint, #2 Exhibit B-Request for Admissions, #3 Exhibit C-Response to Request for Admissions, #4 Exhibit D-Motion to Compel, #5 Exhibit E-Amended Response to Request for Admissions, #6 Exhibit F-State Court Record, #7 Exhibit G-State Court Notice of Filing Notice of Removal, #8 Civil Cover Sheet, #9 State Court ANSWER)(East, Joleen)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ragle v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.
Represented By: Joleen N. East
Represented By: Robert L. Blank
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michael Ragle
Represented By: Jonathan Isaac Rotstein
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?