Arcangel v. Huntington Atlantic Hotels, LLC
United States District Court for the District of Maryland
2018 WL 5885517 (2018)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Gilbert Arcangel (plaintiff) and Marygrace Arcangel (plaintiff), guests at a Marriott hotel owned by Huntington Atlantic Hotels, LLC (Huntington) (defendant), were allegedly bitten by bedbugs. The Arcangels told the hotel, which had pest-control company Ecolab, Inc. (defendant) exterminate the bedbugs, but Ecolab allegedly failed to properly perform its duties. The Arcangels sued Huntington and Ecolab. In Count I of their complaint, the Arcangels asserted a state-law negligence claim against Huntington for putting them in an infested room. In Count II, the Arcangels claimed that Huntington had violated the Maryland Consumer Protection Act (MCPA) by impliedly representing that the room was fit to occupy. In Count III, the Arcangels asserted a negligence claim against Ecolab for failing to properly inspect their room and exterminate the bedbugs. The Arcangels sought $75,000 in damages for Count I and $75,000 for Count II. Huntington and Ecolab removed the case to federal court, arguing that the amount-in-controversy requirement for removal to federal court had been met because Arcangels sought a total of $150,000 in damages against Huntington. The Arcangels moved to remand, and the district court considered the motion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Xinis, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.