Removing Common Sense from Removals Sua Sponte
Litigation attorney Eric Alexander published a blog for Drug & Device Law discussing Mehram v. ICU Med. Inc., a U.S. District Court for the Central District of California decision addressing removal and the amount-in-controversy requirement in a product liability wrongful death case. He relates that the court sua sponte remanded the matter after concluding the notice of removal did not include enough evidence to establish that more than $75,000 was at stake, even though the complaint alleged catastrophic injuries, wrongful death and related damages. Mr. Alexander contends that the decision applied an outdated standard rather than the U.S. Supreme Court's framework in Dart Cherokee, which provides that a notice of removal only needs to plausibly allege the jurisdictional threshold unless the amount is challenged. He also discusses the broader implications for removal practice, particularly the extent to which defendants should be required to substantiate the amount in controversy at the outset of litigation.