From our private database of 32,100+ case briefs...
Guglielmino v. McKee Foods Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
506 F.3d 696 (2007)
Carlo Guglielmino and Briant Chun-Hoon (the distributors) (plaintiffs) distributed bakery products for McKee Foods Corporation (defendant). The distributors sued McKee in California state court on behalf of a putative class of McKee distributors, alleging that McKee’s treatment of the distributors violated wage-and-hour laws. The complaint’s Jurisdiction and Venue section alleged that the damages to each plaintiff were less than $75,000. However, the complaint’s Prayer for Relief section requested no specific dollar amount and sought relief including compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney fees, payment of back taxes and benefits, an accounting of money due to the distributors, and injunctive and declaratory relief. McKee removed the action to federal district court, asserting that the damages sought by the distributors, if recoverable, would significantly exceed the $75,000 amount-in-controversy requirement for federal diversity-jurisdiction purposes (the so-called jurisdictional amount). The distributors sought remand to the state court. The distributors conceded that they were diverse from McKee, but they argued that McKee had improperly calculated the amount in controversy. The district court denied the distributors’ motion to remand. The court applied a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard under which McKee had the burden of showing that the amount in controversy more likely than not exceeded the jurisdictional amount. The court found that removal was proper under that standard after considering the potential economic damages, attorney fees, and punitive damages at stake in the action and determining that both Guglielmino’s and Hoon’s allegations met the amount-in-controversy requirement. The Ninth Circuit granted Guglielmino’s petition for an interlocutory appeal.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (O’Scannlain, J.)
Concurrence (O’Scannlain, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 583,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 583,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 32,100 briefs, keyed to 984 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.