Business Law Cases1

Business Law Cases1 - Whitev.FCIUSA ,FifthCircuit,2003 319F.3d672 I.FACTS OnMarch29,2001,,againstherformer employer,thedefendantFCIUSA,Inc.

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
White v. FCI USA                                        United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 2003 319 F.3d 672                                                                       I.  FACTS: On March 29, 2001, Regina White brought suit in a Texas state court, against her former  employer, the defendant FCI USA, Inc. for wrongful termination because she did not  perform illegal acts. She sought punitive damages, attorneys' fees, prejudgment interest,  court costs, and compensatory damages for lost pay, lost fringe benefits, loss of wage  earning capacity, harm to her credit and credit reputation, and mental anguish and  emotional distress. She did not specify how much monetary relief she was seeking. On  May 25, 2001, FCI sought to remove the case to a federal district court on the basis of  diversity asserting that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000. White filed a  petition opposing removal. II. Issue(s):   Whether the case was moved to a federal district court? NO III. Holding : State Court; District court. IV. Reason : White spoke on the basis of an assumption that the amount will exceed $75,000. She  never specified it which is what the court wanted to hear. She also failed to timely  contest the removal with a sworn, unrebutted affidavit indicating that the requisite  amount in controversy was not present V. Rule of Law :   Concurrent federal jurisdiction occurs in a civil court when there is a diversity of  citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. White could not prove that  the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 which led to the district court’s decision  being affirmed.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson Supreme Court of the United States, 1980 444 U.S. 286, 100 S.Ct. 559, 62 L.Ed.2d 490 I.  FACTS: Harry and Kay Robinson purchased a new Audi automobile from Seaway Volkswagen,  Inc. Seaway in Massena, New York. They left for a new home in Arizona but had resided  in Newyork for years. On their way through Oklahoma, their car was struck by another  car causing fire that severely burned Kay and her two children. The Robinsons brought a  products-liability suit in the District court in Oklahoma, claiming that their injuries  resulted from the defective design of the Audi gas tank and fuel system. The defendants  were (Audi) the manufacturer, (World-Wide Volkswagen Corp.) the regional distributor,  and (Seaway) the retail distributor. The Oklahoma Supreme Court upheld the assertion  of state jurisdiction, and World-Wide Seaway appealed. II. Issue(s)
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/20/2012 for the course H/A 121 taught by Professor Alamo during the Spring '12 term at Morgan.

Page1 / 19

Business Law Cases1 - Whitev.FCIUSA ,FifthCircuit,2003 319F.3d672 I.FACTS OnMarch29,2001,,againstherformer employer,thedefendantFCIUSA,Inc.

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online