Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Michael J. Corgnati

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 4, 2012

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY
v.
MICHAEL J. CORGNATI, ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable George H. King, U. S. District Judge

E-Filed -- JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Presiding: The Honorable GEORGE H. KING, U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Beatrice Herrera N/A N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendant:

None None

Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order Remanding Case

On May 18, 2012, we issued an Order directing Defendants Michael J. Corgnati and Jack Savage ("Defendants") to show cause ("OSC") why the above-captioned action should not be remanded to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We noted that Defendants' Notice of Removal asserted that we have federal question jurisdiction based upon purported federal defenses and counterclaims. We stated that, on its face, the state court Complaint alleges only a claim for unlawful detainer, which does not provide us with jurisdiction under the "well-pleaded complaint" rule. We further stated that federal jurisdiction cannot rest upon actual or anticipated federal defenses or counterclaims. See California ex rel. Lockyer v. Dynegy, Inc., 375 F.3d 831, 838 (9th Cir. 2004) ("[A] defense is not part of a plaintiff's properly pleaded statement of his or her claim. (quoting Rivet v. Regions Bank, 522 U.S. 470, 475 (1998))); Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49, 60 (2009) ("[F]ederal jurisdiction [cannot] rest upon an actual or anticipated counterclaim."). Defendants timely responded to our OSC. Their response, which is largely unintelligible, again asserts that we have federal question jurisdiction based upon purported federal defenses or counterclaims. As noted, we previously explained that federal jurisdiction cannot rest upon an actual or anticipated defense or counterclaim. Accordingly, this case is hereby REMANDED to the state court from which it was removed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Deputy Clerk Bea

20120604

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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