Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Title: Udr Pinebrook, L.P. v. Candice Loving

September 21, 2011

TITLE: UDR PINEBROOK, L.P.
v.
CANDICE LOVING



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Cormac J. Carney, United States District Judge

JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL

PRESENT: HONORABLE CORMAC J. CARNEY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Nancy Boehme N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

None Present None Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REMANDING CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Plaintiff UDR Pinebrook, L.P. filed this unlawful detainer action against Defendant Candice Loving in the Superior Court for the County of Orange on July 22, 2011, related to the property at 1555 Mesa Verde Drive East, #46-G in Costa Mesa. (Notice of Removal, Exh. A.) On July 29, 2011, Ms. Loving answered the Complaint. (Notice of Removal, Exh. B.) On August 25, 2011, a writ of possession was issued, which ordered Ms. Loving to vacate the premises by September 5, 2011. (Notice of Removal, Exh. C.) On September 6, 2011, Ms. Loving removed the action to federal court based on the civil rights removal statute and diversity jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 1.)

A defendant may remove a civil action filed in state court to a federal district court if the federal court may exercise original jurisdiction over the action. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b). The defendant removing the action to federal court bears the burden of establishing that the district court has subject matter jurisdiction over the action, and the removal statute is strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980

F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992) ("Federal jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any doubt as to the right of removal in the first instance.") A federal court can assert subject matter jurisdiction over cases that (1) involve questions arising under federal law or (2) are between diverse parties and involve an amount in controversy that exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332. Cases may also be removed to federal court if they are civil rights cases within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1443. If it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction at any time prior to the entry of final judgment, the Court must remand the action to state court. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL

Case No. SACV 11-01342-CJC(ANx)

Date: September ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.