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.

Thr California Lp Etc. v. Doris Boykins

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MAKE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 19, 2013

THR CALIFORNIA LP ETC.
v.
DORIS BOYKINS

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Manuel L. Real, Judge

JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL

William Horrell None Present Courtroom Deputy Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS: None None

PROCEEDINGS: MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) SUA SPONTE REMANDING ACTION TO STATE COURT

A district court must remand a case to state court "if at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction." 28 U.S.C. 1447(c). Because this is an unlawful detainer action, a federal question does not present itself. See Indymac Federal Bank, F.S.B. v. Ocampo, No. CV 09-2337, 2010 WL 234828, *2 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2010) (sua sponte remanding an action to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction where plaintiff's complaint contained only an unlawful detainer claim). As such, this case is now REMANDED TO STATE COURT. Also, the pro se individual who seems to have attempted this removal, Vada Everett Boykins, is not the named defendant in the underlying action and has no standing to do anything in this case; however, had defendant Doris Boykins herself attempted the removal, the result would be the same, the case would be remanded for the reasons as listed above.

IT IS SO ORDERED AND REMANDED.

cc: counsel of record

20130219

© 1992-2013 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.