Court Opinion

ID: 8732176
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-26 09:51:27.404977+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:59:46.202475
License: Public Domain

EGAN, District Judge.
Defendants (husband and wife) move to dismiss plaintiffs’ (husband and wife) diversity tort action for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that there is no possibility that a verdict in excess of $10,000 could be sustained. Defendants aver that plaintiffs’ injuries were minimal and that their medical expenses totaled $37.
On the other hand, plaintiffs allege-that an orthopedic surgeon diagnosed the-wife plaintiff’s injuries as acute lumbo-sacral strain, sciatic syndrome and a possible protruded disc syndrome which may require surgery and a long hospital stay.
We believe it to be well settled that in a diversity case, where the plaintiff alleges the damages to be in excess of the jurisdictional amount, the Court will not dismiss the complaint unless there is a legal certainty that the damages will not reach or approximate this amount. See Norwood Lumber Corp. v. McKean, 3 Cir., 1946, 153 F.2d 753; Sicilia v. Tassell, D.C.E.D.Pa.1958, 163 F.Supp. 371; Hinchliffe v. Carr, D.C.E.D.Pa. 1958, 22 F.R.D. 187.
Defendants’ motion to dismiss will be and hereby is denied.
It is so ordered.