Senator Jeremy Hutchinson

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:26:36)

But there's a lot who don't, and it's a crapshoot. So this would provide guidance for everybody involved and guidance to the federal judges. Thank you, Senator. Seeing no additional questions

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:26:30)

That's exactly right, and there are some judges, state judges, who do limit, even if you get it.

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:24:59)

and they'll tell you this is a problem that spends a lot of resources in attorney's times and defendants' resources hiring attorneys just to fight over this issue that could

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:24:26)

And you just want your day in court in state court. And you end up fighting forever over what the damages are going to end up being. And it's all speculation and what's punitive and what's it. And bring in experts and spend a fortune to try to just get your case in state court. And the defendants are spending a fortune trying to get it in federal court. And this removes all that. And I think, Mr. Walker, you can talk to any number of lawyers who practice in federal court,

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:24:14)

can cite you opinion after opinion where they're keeping cases filed under the threshold. And I think probably Chairman Williams can give you cases where he gets removed to federal court.

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:23:07)

I don't think it is at all working okay. And I'm in federal court and get removed often. And, yes, I can see a

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:22:38)

get those back to state court quickly where they belong, I think. And I'm trying to also keep cases that are worth millions from being filed in state court under $75,000, and everybody knows you're going to ask for punitives, and then you go to federal court or you get sent back to state court and waste our state court resources on a case that belonged in federal court. Do you

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:21:22)

conference call with them last night. I don't know. I can't say that they've endorsed it, but there's their legislative committee. Mr. Brooks, Ryan Brooks, you're probably aware of, asked for this amendment. We've got it for them, and they felt very comfortable with it after that. I don't want to say they endorsed it because I don't know if they've ever met to take it formal, but they felt very comfortable with it. At least the

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:20:43)

it's assumed you're beneath that threshold and so you're in state court they will move you to federal court and fight it out and you can still do that the difference is now if you don't assert anything you assume you're under $75,000, then you're going to be bound by that because you sought to access our state court's resources. So you may want to, if you think it may go over $75,000, you probably don't want to remain silent anymore. You'll probably want to say this

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:20:24)

in an adjoining state? They don't have to declare anything. they can do filing a complaint just like you would today if you don't assert anything in state court I believe if you don't assert any damages it's assumed you're beneath because you filed in state court

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:19:34)

But even that amended complaint, if

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:19:00)

you know what you've got, you know what court you're going to be in, and you can get right to the merits and have your case heard. I think it's helpful for every practicing attorney, whether they're on the defense or plaintiffs, and I think it's helpful for plaintiffs to be able to choose which court they want to bring their case in, and it's helpful for defendants to know that if we're going to be in state court, at least we know what our exposure is. There's not going to be any surprises at the end. So in limited cases, you may have to file an amended complaint,

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:18:30)

Plaintiff's lawyers are usually on contingency working sometimes a year on is this damage really, what's the damage it's actually going to be. They'll cite Oklahoma, this similar case in Oklahoma, had this amount of damage. And you talk about work, that's work, only to try to get you back to the court that you filed it in. And the defendants are just trying to get some protection as well. This just, everybody, if you're under $75,000 and you assert that, then everybody knows the playing field,

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:17:57)

to amend your complaint if you see that your damages are going to exceed the $75,000. You may want to amend, and that adds a little work to the plaintiff's lawyer. But you don't have to fight removals, and you don't have to – I mean, I don't know But you want to talk about some pleading, go to federal court and try to get it remanded back to state court, and the defendants are paying a lot of money to lawyers, too, to try to get it back to state court.

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:17:51)

a case, and I said that in my opening, where you may need

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:16:04)

but that's a strategic decision that lawyers are going to have to make. So there is an extra burden on the plaintiff's lawyer before filing that they do a legitimate and thorough damage assessment. Well, let me ask you. The benefit to the plaintiff's lawyer is they don't have to spend a year in federal court just trying to get back to state court. So I think

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:15:29)

Well, again, I think it does put a little extra burden on a plaintiff's lawyer to really assess the value of the case before filing. um it gives also though because you if there's accruing damages then you you better know what you think that's going to be and if it's going to surpass 75,000 and it significantly passes it for me personally if it's i could get 80,000 and end up in federal court or i could cap myself at 75,000 and know i'm going to be in state court i'd plead less than 75,000 just to know i'm in state court

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:14:19)

you better be doing it legitimately. Don't come in here claiming you're going to ask for less than $75,000

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:13:46)

and these pray for damages can be believed, the state statute says they're bound by it. So a federal judge would look at state law and say, well, they've asked for less than $75,000. State statute says they're bound to less than $75,000, so there's no chance it rises above that $75,000. So it's in state court. All right, so you're

Meeting — March 1, 2011 (1:14:12)

yes, and then I'm also trying to say that if you're utilizing our resources in the state courts,