Romo

Romo v. FFG Insurance

Good Law
397 F. Supp. 2d 1237·2005 WL 3005639
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaNovember 7, 2005SACV05316DOCRNBXCalifornia1,538 words

Opinion

Opinion

Carter, J.

ORDER IN RE: SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

On August 29, 2005, this Court issued an order to show cause re: subject matter jurisdiction; specifically with regard to the question of whether civil penalties may be included in the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction. The parties filed simultaneous briefing on the issue on October 11, 2005. After reviewing the memoranda, the Court ordered supplemental briefing addressing whether the Court has federal question jurisdiction and whether Plaintiff is unable to satisfy the diversity amount in controversy requirement to a “legal certainty.” Because the Court finds that Plaintiff has federal question jurisdiction under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Improvement Act (“Magnuson-Moss Act” or “Act”), the Court does not reach the question of whether the Court has diversity jurisdiction.

The Magnuson-Moss Act allows a “consumer” to bring suit when he claims to have to been “damaged by the failure of a supplier, warrantor, or service contractor to comply with any obligation under this [Act], or under a written warranty, implied warranty, or service contract.” 15 U.S.C. § 2310 (d)(1). Plaintiff here alleges that Defendant…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.