Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 MAY 2025

When Removing Diversity Cases Defendants Cannot "Embiggen" The Amount-In-Controversy Through Attorneys' Fee Estimates

Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Contributor
Explore more from Duane Morris LLP

In an order issued on May 13, 2025, Judge Joshua Wolson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled that a case removed to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Jerry Maatman
Jerry Maatman
Shannon Noelle
Shannon Noelle
Anna Sheridan
Anna Sheridan
Author LinkedIn connections

Duane Morris Takeaways: In an order issued on May 13, 2025, Judge Joshua Wolson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled that a case removed to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction had to be remanded back to state court given that the amount-in-controversy (AIC) alleged was based on an attorneys' fee award that exceeded the plaintiff's damages award by "at least seven times."

Case Background

On January 9, 2025, Plaintiff Frank Wise sued his former employer Kimberly-Clark, a manufacturer of paper-based consumer products, in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas on behalf of himself and a putative class, accusing his former employer of violating the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act ("PMWA") by failing to pay overtime for the time spent walking to and from job assignments in the Defendant's manufacturing facility. As part of its remedial regime, the PMWA permits a prevailing party to recover "reasonable" attorneys'

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.

Register for freeORLog in

Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Tenth Circuit Stays Nationwide Eligibility Injunction For Class Of 2022 In Wisne v. NCAA

On August 21, 2026, the Tenth Circuit granted the NCAA’s stay request in Wisne v. NCAA, temporarily restoring the NCAA’s age-based eligibility rules pending resolution of the appeal. Three weeks earlier, Judge Sweeney of the District of Colorado had issued a nationwide injunction that permitted athletes in the Class of 2022 to pursue a fifth year of eligibility.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney
Article

“LEGAL ANALYSIS SO POOR THAT IT HARDLY DESERVES THE LABEL”: Fifth Circuit COA Destroys Federal Judge For Using AI And I Cannot Believe Lawyers Are Still Using This Junk

A Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling harshly criticizes a federal district judge for relying on AI-generated content in legal orders, revealing fabricated facts and poor legal analysis. The decision raises critical questions about the use of generative AI in legal practice and whether lawyers who adopt such technology are compromising their ethical obligations of competence, confidentiality, and integrity.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Troutman Amin LLP
Troutman Amin LLP
Article

Show Your Work: California Federal Court Denies Preliminary Approval Of Data Breach Class Action Settlement

A federal court in California denied preliminary approval of a $2.3 million data breach settlement affecting over 220,000 individuals, finding seven critical deficiencies in the proposed agreement. The decision highlights the rigorous scrutiny courts apply to class action settlements, particularly regarding claims-made distribution processes, inadequate documentation of settlement value, and unexplained disparate treatment among class members.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

California Federal Court Denies TikTok’s Motion To Dismiss Children’s Privacy Claims Based On Prior Class Action Settlements

A federal court rejected TikTok's attempt to use two prior nationwide class action settlements—totaling over $93 million—to dismiss new privacy claims brought by minors alleging violations of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. The ruling hinged on whether the current plaintiffs were demonstrably members of the earlier settlement classes based solely on the pleadings, raising critical questions about the scope and enforceability of broad settlement releases in successive privacy litiga
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Video

MR. NUMBER 1 WINS AGAIN!: Concora Credit To Pay $9.375MM To Settle TCPA Wrong Number Class Action As Another Company Bows To Greenwald (Video)

Concora Credit has agreed to pay $9.375 million to settle a TCPA class action lawsuit over wrong number robocalls, with prominent TCPA attorney Mike Greenwald securing another major victory. The settlement includes over $5 million for approximately 147,000 class members, $3 million in attorney fees, and a commitment to spend at least $1 million on TCPA compliance over three years.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Troutman Amin LLP
Troutman Amin LLP
Article

US Federal Court Confirms A Foreign Arbitral Award And Enforces Contractual Post-judgment Interest In Lieu Of The Federal Statutory Rate

A US federal court confirmed a $350 million arbitral award against the Republic of Georgia and enforced a contractual post-judgment interest rate of SOFR plus four percent, compounding monthly, rather than the lower statutory rate. The decision demonstrates how carefully drafted contractual language extending interest "after as well as before judgment" can result in substantially higher recoveries for creditors in international arbitration enforcement proceedings.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
DLA Piper
DLA Piper
Article

FTC Issues Rigorous Requirements On Using AI-Assisted Review Or Technology-Assisted Review To Respond To Investigational Subpoenas

The Federal Trade Commission has introduced stringent new requirements for parties using technology-assisted review or artificial intelligence in document production during investigations, mandating extensive upfront disclosures, prescriptive performance metrics, and validation processes. These requirements represent a significant departure from previous FTC practice and may discourage parties from using AI or TAR due to increased complexity and agency oversight. Parties now face critical decisions about wh
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Arnold & Porter
Arnold & Porter
Article

DHS Proposes $70,000 And $30,000 Fees For F-1 Optional Practical Training

The Department of Homeland Security has proposed a controversial new rule requiring SEVP-certified schools to pay substantial fees—$70,000 for a student's first Optional Practical Training recommendation and $30,000 for each subsequent OPT application, including STEM extensions. With only a 30-day comment period and potential annual costs reaching up to $16.5 billion across nearly 2,500 affected institutions, the proposed regulation is expected to face significant legal challenges if finalized.
United StatesImmigration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

SEC Proposes Rule Amendments To Expand Retail Access To Private Markets

The SEC has proposed sweeping amendments to expand retail investor access to private market strategies, including changes to performance-based compensation rules for registered investment advisers and modernization of the interval fund framework. The proposals also explore new credential-based pathways for individuals to qualify as accredited investors, potentially opening private offerings to a broader pool of eligible participants.
United StatesFinance and Banking
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

California Court Of Appeal Finds That An Employment Arbitration Agreement Entered Into “Freely And Voluntarily” Actually Was Forced, Illegal, And Invalid Under California Law

The California Court of Appeal ruled that requiring employees to sign arbitration agreements as a condition of employment violates California Labor Code section 432.6 when the Federal Arbitration Act does not apply. The court found that even agreements stating they are "voluntary" on their face may be unenforceable if evidence shows employees had no real choice but to sign or seek other employment.
United StatesEmployment and HR
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP