In Korn v. Polo Ralph Lauren Corp., a dash of plaintiff's allegations and a pinch of defendant's evidence beats remand under CAFA

In Korn v. Polo Ralph Lauren Corp., the defendant found the right recipe for resisting the plaintiff's efforts to remand the matter back to state court.  (Korn v. Polo Ralph Lauren Corp. (E.D. Cal. 2008) 536 F.Supp.2d 1199.)  First, defendant successfully opposed plaintiff's argument that defendant had not established diverse citizenship.  The Court accepted as true the plaintiff's allegation that Polo Ralph Lauren Corp. was incorporated in Delaware, with a principle place of business in New Jersey.  (Korn, at p. 1203.)  Second, the Court coupled plaintiff's demand for $1,000 in statutory penalties per unlawful transaction with defendant's declaration that it had processed more than 5,000 credit transactions to conclude that the amount in controversy exceeded $5 million.  (Korn, at p. 1205-6.)  The moral of the story is that you can plead around CAFA removal, but not if you insist on alleging facts that will undermine any possibility for a successful remand motion.

[Via Class Action Defense Blog]