Reported / Citable
Background
Michael Potosky sued Core Occupational Medicine, LLC and Bechtel Corporation in Texas state court, alleging religious discrimination, retaliation, tortious interference with contract, and intentional infliction of emotional distress arising from his employment termination. His original petition sought several categories of damages but did not allege a specific amount.
Potosky amended his petition on May 15, 2026, naming Core, LLC and stating that he sought damages not exceeding $2 million. Core removed the case on June 12, 2026. Potosky moved to remand, arguing that Core had been able to ascertain removability from the original petition and therefore missed the 30-day deadline under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b).
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Karen Betancourt recommended denying the motion to remand. Although complete diversity and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000 supported federal jurisdiction, the disputed issue was whether Core removed the action within the statutory 30-day period.
Applying the Fifth Circuit’s bright-line rule, the court concluded that the original petition did not trigger the removal clock because it did not affirmatively allege damages exceeding $75,000. The clock began when Core received the amended petition on May 15, making the June 12 removal timely. Because the amount-in-controversy issue resolved timeliness, the court declined to decide whether Potosky’s original identification of Core involved misnomer or misidentification.
Key Takeaways
- In the Fifth Circuit, an initial pleading triggers the 30-day removal period based on the amount in controversy only when it affirmatively reveals that the plaintiff seeks more than the federal jurisdictional minimum.
- References to damages or earnings from which a defendant might infer that more than $75,000 is at stake do not replace a specific allegation exceeding that threshold.
- This ruling is a report and recommendation; the parties had 14 days to submit specific written objections to the district judge.
Why It Matters
The recommendation illustrates the practical force of the Fifth Circuit’s bright-line approach to removal deadlines. Defendants generally need not investigate or calculate whether an unspecified damages demand exceeds $75,000; the 30-day clock begins when a qualifying pleading or other paper makes removability affirmatively ascertainable.