Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 APRIL 2013

CAFA Jurisdiction Cannot Be Evaded By Limiting Amount In Controversy

The U.S. Supreme Court holds in a 9–0 decision that class action plaintiffs cannot promise to limit damages in an effort to remain below the Class Action Fairness Act's $5 million federal jurisdictional threshold.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
John Battenfeld
John Battenfeld
Kristofor Henning
Kristofor Henning
Kenneth Kliebard
Kenneth Kliebard
Franco Corrado
Franco Corrado

The U.S. Supreme Court holds in a 9–0 decision that class action plaintiffs cannot promise to limit damages in an effort to remain below the Class Action Fairness Act's $5 million federal jurisdictional threshold.

Under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a defendant in a class action filed in state court may remove the case to federal court if, among other requirements, the projected amount in controversy exceeds $5 million. Notwithstanding that provision, some class action plaintiffs have successfully avoided CAFA removal by stipulating that they will not seek more than $5 million on behalf of the putative class. On March 19, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles that a named plaintiff cannot avoid federal CAFA jurisdiction (if CAFA jurisdiction is otherwise appropriate) by stipulating, prior to class certification, that the class will not seek aggregate damages in excess of $5 million.1 The Court held that

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from