Trying to hide the amount in controversy to prevent removal is a thing that happens, although it rarely works against an on-the-ball defendant.northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 9:01 pm I also noticed they did not include the amount they are asking for and instead only said an amount determined at trial. In their cover sheet, for the area that is only for data records and not to be used elsewhere (i.e., not by a party if it is not in the complaint), they said $100K+. Are they trying to prevent removal by hiding that they intend to go for more than $75K?
I am wondering.
However, while I can't be arsed to research Florida law for such a stupid claim, in many (most?) jurisdictions, it's allowed, indeed preferred, to claim "an amount of damages to proved at trial" rather than alleging a specific amount of damages.
Indeed, in some jurisdictions, it's forbidden to name a specific amount of damages, out of a concern that the amount alleged -- frequently pure moonshine -- will improperly influence a jury (i) if the pleadings are given to the jury,* and (ii) out of a concern that the jury could be indirectly influenced by press coverage of trillion dollar damage claims.
In such jurisdictions the burden is on a defendant seeking to remove an action based on diversity to come up with evidence establishing that the amount in controversy is greater than $75,000, and they usually figure out a way to do so if the amount is indeed that great. The defendant is given some leeway and isn't limited to the complaint in satisfying this burden.
________
* Pleadings are admissions and are therefore admissible against the pleading party , but it's my impression that in modern practice relevant admissions are provided to the jury in the form of court-approved stipulations, instead of the full actual pleadings. Pleadings frequently contain all sorts of improper folderol that shouldn't be given to a jury.