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.

Onewest Bank F.S.B. v. Sabacky

United States District Court, C.D. California

December 15, 2014

ONEWEST BANK F.S.B., Plaintiff,
v.
DALE SABACKY and DOES 1 -5, Defendant

For Onewest Bank FSB, Plaintiff: Eric G Fernandez, Viana G Barbu, LEAD ATTORNEYS, TFLG A Law Corporation, Davis, CA.

Dale Sabacky, Defendant, Pro se, Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA.

DEAN D. PREGERSON, United States District Judge. FREDERICK F. MUMM, United States Magistrate Judge.

ORDER SUMMARILY REMANDING ACTION TO STATE COURT AND PROHIBITING DEFENDANT FROM FILING ANY FURTHER NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 13F10597

DEAN D. PREGERSON, United States District Judge.

The Court will remand this action to state court summarily because Defendant removed it improperly.

On December 3, 2014, Defendant Dale Sabacky, having been sued in what appears to be a routine unlawful detainer action in California state court (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 13F10597), filed a Notice of Removal of that action to this Court and also presented an application to proceed in forma pauperis . Defendant has previously removed this same unlawful detainer proceeding on a prior occasion. On the prior occasion, this Court remanded the action noting that federal jurisdiction does not exist. ( See Onewest Bank, FSB v. Sabacky, Case No. CV 14-2445 FMO (AJWx).)

The Court has denied the in forma pauperis application under separate cover because the action, again, was not properly removed. To prevent the action from remaining in jurisdictional limbo, the Court issues this Order to remand the action to state court. Moreover, to prevent Defendant from further abusing the federal court to obstruct his state proceedings without any basis, the Court issues this order prohibiting him from filing any further notice of removal with respect to this unlawful detainer action.

Simply stated, as the Court has previously determined, Plaintiff could not have brought this action in federal court in the first place, in that Defendant does not competently allege facts supplying either diversity or federal-question jurisdiction, and therefore removal is improper. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a); see Exxon Mobil Corp v. Allapattah Svcs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 563, 125 S.Ct. 2611, 162 L.Ed.2d 502 (2005). Even if complete diversity of citizenship existed, the amount in controversy does not exceed the diversity-jurisdiction threshold of $75, 000. See 28 U.S.C. § § 1332, 1441(b). On the contrary, the unlawful-detainer complaint recites that the amount in controversy does not exceed $10, 000.

Nor does Plaintiff's unlawful detainer action raise any federal legal question. See 28 U.S.C. § § 1331, 1441(b).

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that (1) this matter be REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, 275 Magnolia, Long Beach, CA 90802 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); (2) that the Clerk send a certified copy of this Order to the state court; and (3) that the Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Dale Sabacky is prohibited from filing any further Notice of Removals of this case from state court without an Order of the Court or of the Chief Judge of the Central District of California allowing him to do so.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.