Hartis, et al v. Chicago Title Ins. Co., No. 11-2552 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs appealed from the district court's denial of their motion to remand their suit against Chicago Title to state court. The court held that Chicago Title had proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $5 million and affirmed the district court's denial of plaintiffs' motion to remand to state court. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to amend. Finally, the court declined to afford plaintiffs with the specific relief sought where plaintiffs have not moved under Rule 60(a) for the district court to correct the judgment or for the court to grant leave for the district court to correct the clerical error at issue. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Civil case - Class Action Fairness Act. For the court's prior opinion in the matter, see Hartis v. Chi. Title Ins. Co., 656 F.3d 778 (8th Cir. 2009). In suit alleging Chicago Title failed to reimburse customers for excess money collected at real estate closings for recording fees, the district court did not err in denying plaintiffs' motion to remand the case to Missouri state court after Chicago Title removed it to federal court as Chicago Title met its burden of showing that the amount in controversy exceeded $5 million; district court did not abuse its discretion by denying plaintiffs' motion to amend their complaint where the plaintiffs were not diligent in seeking the amendment; where judgment did not match the court's order, the plaintiffs have the ability to seek Rule 60(a) relief following the conclusion of the appeal.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.