Brooksons v. Carter case as a Defendant

Fred Brookson, a lifelong resident of Klamath Falls, Oregon, has hired your firm to file suit against Wendell Carter for injuries sustained as a result of an incident that occurred in southern Oregon. About three months ago, Brookson and his wife, Ellen, from whom he is now separated, participated in a demonstration concerning recent acts of violence against doctors practicing in a local abortion clinic. The demonstration occurred on a wharf extending into the Coos River. A group of people, including Wendell Carter, gathered around the demonstrators and began to heckle them. The two groups exchanged remarks and eventually the hecklers threw rocks and bottles at the demonstrators. When Carter threw a rock that struck and injured Ellen, Fred became angry and approached Carter. Carter said he regretted injuring Ellen because he had been aiming at Fred. The two men exchanged heated remarks. Then, without any provocation, Carter pulled out a knife, screamed, and lunged at Brookson, intending to stab him. As Brookson jumped back to avoid being injured, he almost bumped into an unidentified demonstrator. The demonstrator, who apparently thought he was being attacked, struck Brookson several times and seriously injured him. Both Brooksons required hospital treatment. Fred Brookson 's medical expenses exceeded $75,000; his estranged wife's expenses were approximately $2,000. Both have lost weight, exhibit chronic anxiety, and have periods of severe insomnia.

Carter grew up in California but has spent the last three years attending college and living with his brother in Oregon. Plaintiff's attorney believes it best to bring this action in federal district court.

1332. Diversity of Citizenship; Amount in Controversy; Costs

(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,00.00, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between ...

(1) citizens of different States...

NOTE TO STUDENTS: (2,3 &4) have been intentionally omitted.

Question as a Defendant

What evidence, law, fact, etc. in favor of the other side is the most damaging to your case? Why?