United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana
NOTICE AND ORDER
WILDER-DOOMES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
a civil action involving claims for damages based upon the
injuries allegedly sustained by Jacqueline Lanus as a result
of a motor vehicle accident that occurred on or about
November 10, 2016. On October 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed a
Complaint in this Court against Corey W. Rakestraw, Everest
National Insurance Company and AMS Services, LLC, asserting
that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1332(a) because the parties are completely
diverse and the amount in dispute exceeds $75,
On October 18, 2017, the undersigned issued an Order giving
Plaintiff ten days to file a comprehensive amended Complaint
properly setting forth the amount in controversy and the
citizenship particulars required to establish that the Court
has diversity jurisdiction over this case. On October 31,
2017, the undersigned granted Plaintiff an additional thirty
days to comply with the October 18, 2017 Order.
November 30, 2017, Plaintiff filed a First Supplemental and
Amending Complaint for Damages (the “Amended
Complaint”), as ordered by the Court. While the Amended
Complaint properly alleges the citizenship of the parties,
Amended Complaint contains the same allegations regarding
Plaintiff's alleged damages as were contained in the
original Complaint. Both pleadings contain the following
allegations regarding the amount in controversy:
As a direct and proximate result of the above-described
accident, Complainant has suffered injuries to her neck, back
and other parts of the mind and body, with accompanying pain
and has also incurred a loss of earnings and/or earnings
[sic] capacity, medical bills, and the loss of the ability to
provide services for herself that she would have otherwise
not apparent from the face of the Amended Complaint that
Plaintiff's claims in this matter are likely to exceed
$75, 000. While Plaintiff seeks several items of damages,
there is no indication of the amount in controversy related
to her alleged damages. This Court has previously explained
that when a plaintiff seeks recovery for broad categories of
damages typically alleged in a personal injury action without
providing any detail regarding the alleged injuries,
“the Court is unable to quantify the potential amount
of recovery for any of these categories with regard to any
individual plaintiff.” Howland v. Fernandez,
Civ. A. No. 15-780-JJB-RLB, 2016 WL 3746171, at *3 (M.D. La.
June 3, 2016) (amount in controversy not facially apparent
where plaintiffs alleged serious personal injuries including
pain and suffering, bodily injury, scarring, mental and
emotional distress, mental pain, anguish and medical
on the foregoing, the Court sua sponte raises the
issue of whether it may exercise diversity jurisdiction in
this matter, specifically, whether the amount in controversy
requirement has been met. See, McDonal v. Abbott
Laboratories, 408 F.3d 177, 182 n.5 (5th Cir. 2005)
(“[A]ny federal court may raise subject matter
jurisdiction sua sponte.”).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Jacqueline Lanus
shall have ten (10) days from the date of this Notice and
Order to file a memorandum and supporting evidence concerning
subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
The supplemental memorandum shall be limited to ten (10)
pages and shall specifically address whether the amount in
controversy is satisfied in this case.
 R. Doc. 1 at ¶¶ 4 and
 Id. at ¶ 2.
 R. Doc. 3.
 R. Doc. 8.