| Litigants: | Rogers v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. |
| Courtseal: | US-CourtOfAppeals-6thCircuit-Seal.png |
| Arguedate: | September 13, |
| Argueyear: | 2000 |
| Decidedate: | October 26, |
| Decideyear: | 2000 |
| Fullname: | Shirley K. Rogers v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. |
| Citations: | 230 F.3d 868 |
| Prior: | Motion to remand denied by U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, June 23, 1999 |
| Judges: | Ralph B. Guy Jr., Karen Nelson Moore, David D. Dowd, Jr. (N.D. Ohio) |
| Majority: | Dowd |
| Joinmajority: | a unanimous court |
Rogers v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 230 F.3d 868 (6th Cir. 2000),[1] was a case decided by the 6th Circuit that held that remand to a state court cannot be achieved after removal to a federal court by lowering the damages sought to fall below the amount in controversy requirement.[2]
The plaintiff sued Walmart in state court for a state law negligence action, seeking $950,000 in damages. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441, the defendant removed to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. The plaintiff reduced the damages sought to less than $75,000 and petitioned for remand to state court because the amount in controversy requirement was no longer met. The 6th Circuit upheld a denial of the petition for remand, holding that the amount in controversy at the time of removal was what mattered.[3]