United States Sixth Circuit

Denial of plaintiffs' motion to remand their class action challenging certain cell phone billing to state court following removal is reversed where each individual claim fell below the amount-in-controversy requirement, and defendant-cellular telephone service provider could not overcome the defect by aggregating plaintiffs' disgorgement claims or by aggregating their punitive-damages claims and it failed to show that the cost of complying with an injunction claim would meet the $75,000 requirement.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/28/2006
• Published 08/28/2006

Judges

• Before:  BATCHELDER and SUTTON, Circuit Judges;  FORESTER, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Dennis E. Murray, Sr., Murray & Murray, Sandusky, Ohio, for Appellants.  John B. Nalbandian, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Dennis E. Murray, Sr., Donna Jean A. Evans, Murray & Murray, Sandusky, Ohio, for Appellants. John B. Nalbandian, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, Cincinnati, Ohio, Thomas J. Lee, Michael J. Zbiegien, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.