Charles H. Karp v. Forest River, Inc.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff alleges he purchased a vehicle from Defendant Forest River that contained “defects, nonconformities, maladjustments, or malfunctions.” (Compl. ¶¶ 5, 10, ECF No. 1-2.)1 The vehicle came with a warranty, but Plaintiff avers that Defendants failed to make the vehicle “conform to the applicable warranties.” (Id. ¶ 13.) On this allegation and others, Plaintiff claims that Defendants’ actions violated the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. (Id. ¶¶ 14–26.) He seeks damages for the

1 Plaintiff filed his original complaint against Forest River and Does 1–50. He later filed amendments to his complaint to name Ford Motor Company and other defendants. (See Amendments to Compl., ECF No. 1-5.) cost of the vehicle, prejudgment interest, civil penalties, and attorneys’ fees. (Id., Prayer for Relief.)

In its Notice of Removal, Ford claimed that diversity jurisdiction exists because the parties are citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. (Notice of Removal ¶¶ 9–25.) To support the latter assertion, Defendant attached the sales contract, which shows that the total sale price for the vehicle was $172,384.80.…