Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Speights Solomons x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Personal Inj. Prod. Liability | South Carolina
Document E-Mailed
***DOCUMENT E-MAILED: True Copy of 95 Opinion and Order to Remand sent to Scott B. Suggs (clerk@darcosc.net). Hard copy also mailed to the same at 110 N Main Street, Darlington, SC 29532-3213. (lgib, )
Order to Show Cause
TEXT ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Plaintiff filed this case in the Darlington County Court of Common Pleas on August 9, 2024, alleging claims arising out of injuries from ingesting perfluorooctanoic acid and perfulorooctanesulfonic acid (collectively, "PFAS") through his well water. [Doc. 1-1.] The Complaint alleges that the PFAS were manufactured and distributed by Defendants and utilized at the Galey and Lord Plant in Society Hill, South Carolina, resulting in the PFAS being released into the soil and water. [Id.] He seeks general and special damages, punitive damages, and costs. [Id. at 4950.] Defendant 3M Company ("3M") removed the case to this Court on August 23, 2024, on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. [Doc. 1.] In support of removal, 3M notes that Plaintiff alleges "he sustained continuing sickness as well as pain and suffering, and invasive medical treatment and will likely... have significant health impacts, pain and suffering, and invasive medical treatment for the remainder of his life." [Id. at 6 (internal quotation marks omitted).] 3M also notes that Plaintiff seeks compensation for ongoing illness and future medical costs as well as punitive damages and alleges he will continue to suffer loss of income and other "great financial loss." [Id. (internal quotation marks omitted).] The Court is not convinced that the amount in controversy requirement is satisfied such that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims. See Callahan v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 6:25-cv-03400-JDA, 2025 WL 1640501 (D.S.C. May 2, 2025); Swafford v. Meer Elec. Contractors, Inc., No. 8:25-cv-00421-JDA, 2025 WL 752518 (D.S.C. Feb. 3, 2025). Accordingly, 3M is ORDERED to show cause, by April 17, 2026, why the Court should not remand this action to state court. Plaintiff shall file a reply by April 22, 2026, to Defendants' response to this Text Order. The Court will address subject matter jurisdiction before ruling on the pending motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Signed by the Honorable Jacquelyn D Austin on 4/14/2026. (lgib, )
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
Phone
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 UK may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.