Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Tremesha Morrison sued Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC in Texas state court for injuries allegedly sustained when she tripped over a pallet left in a store aisle by a Walmart employee. Morrison alleged a serious right-ankle injury and sought damages for medical expenses, pain and suffering, impairment, disfigurement, and lost wages.
Walmart removed the case to federal court on diversity grounds. Morrison’s petition selected the Texas pleading category for monetary relief of $250,000 or less but did not specify a particular amount of damages. Walmart argued that the petition and Morrison’s failure to stipulate that she sought no more than $75,000 established the federal jurisdictional threshold.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted Morrison’s motion to remand. Although complete diversity existed because Morrison was a Texas citizen and Walmart was a citizen of Delaware and Arkansas, Walmart failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000.
The petition’s general allegations of a serious ankle injury and several categories of damages did not make the jurisdictional amount facially apparent because they supplied no details about the injury, treatment, medical costs, or value of the claims. Walmart offered no summary-judgment-type evidence establishing the amount in controversy, and Morrison’s failure to stipulate to damages of $75,000 or less was insufficient by itself. The court therefore remanded the action to the 40th Judicial District Court of Ellis County, Texas.
Key Takeaways
- Selecting Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 47’s category for relief of $250,000 or less does not, without more, establish that more than $75,000 is in controversy.
- General allegations of serious injury and multiple damages categories may be insufficient when the petition does not describe the injury, treatment, expenses, or claim value in detail.
- A plaintiff’s refusal or failure to stipulate below the federal jurisdictional threshold is relevant but does not alone satisfy the removing defendant’s evidentiary burden.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that a removing defendant must support diversity jurisdiction with concrete allegations or evidence when a state-court petition pleads only a broad damages range. The upper limit of a Texas Rule 47 category and an unanswered stipulation request cannot substitute for proof that the claim likely exceeds $75,000.