U.S. Bank NA v. Donald
| U.S. Bank NA |
| Beverley Donald and Aitken |
| 3:2019cv01775 |
| November 12, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Kari A Dooley |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 26, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Case remanded to State Court Judicial District of Fairfield. (Fanelle, N.) |
| JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS SURVEY - FOR COUNSEL ONLY: The following link to the confidential survey requires you to log into CM/ECF for SECURITY purposes. Once in CM/ECF you will be prompted for the case number. Although you are receiving this survey through CM/ECF, it is hosted on an independent website called SurveyMonkey. Once in SurveyMonkey, the survey is located in a secure account. The survey is not docketed and it is not sent directly to the judge. To ensure anonymity, completed surveys are held up to 90 days before they are sent to the judge for review. We hope you will take this opportunity to participate, please click on this link: https://ecf.ctd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Dispatch.pl?survey (Imbriani, Susan) |
Filing 7
ORDER OF REMAND. On November 12, 2019, the self-represented Defendant, Beverley Donald (the "Defendant"), removed this action from the Connecticut Superior Court. See U.S. Bank, N.A., as Trustee for the Registered Holders of Structured Asset Securities Corporation, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-SC1 v. Donald, Beverley, FKA Beverley Aitken et al., No. FBT-CV14-6047487-S. Because the Court lacks jurisdiction over this action and because removal is untimely, the Court sua sponte remands this matter to the Superior Court for the reasons set forth below. Federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction over only matters in which a federal question is raised or there is diversity of citizenship. See 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1332. Federal question jurisdiction exists where the action "aris[es] under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. 1331. "[A] suit 'arises under' federal law 'only when the plaintiff's statement of his own cause of action shows that it is based upon federal law.'" Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49, 60 (2009) (quoting Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Mottley, 211 U.S. 149, 152 (1908)). Diversity jurisdiction exists only where there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C. 1332(a). Here, there is no basis for federal question jurisdiction. The underlying complaint sounds only in foreclosure, and "it is well settled that judgments of foreclosure... are fundamentally matters of state law." Muong v. Fed. Nat. Mortgage Ass'n, No. 13-cv-06564 (KAM), 2013 WL 6667374, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 16, 2013) (collecting cases). While the Defendant purports to assert civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C 1983 arising from the Plaintiff's alleged actions and misconduct during the foreclosure proceedings, federal jurisdiction cannot be predicated on the Defendant's actual or anticipated defenses or counterclaims in those proceedings. See Vaden, 556 U.S. at 60. Nor is this case removable on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. Even accepting the Defendant's representation that the parties are diverse, "[a] state court case is not removable... based solely on diversity jurisdiction if any defendant is a citizen of the state in which the action is brought." Wells Fargo Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. White, No. 3:17-cv-00858 (VAB), 2018 WL 650372, at *2 (D. Conn. Jan. 31, 2018) (citing 28 U.S.C. 1441(b)(2)). Here, the case was commenced against the Defendant in Connecticut Superior Court, and the Defendant is a citizen of the state of Connecticut. Additionally, a notice of removal generally must "be filed within 30 days after the receipt by the defendant... of a copy of the initial pleading... or within 30 days after the service of summons upon the defendant... whichever period is shorter." 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(1). That the state court action was filed in 2014 therefore renders the Defendant's notice of removal untimely. See U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Berkowska , No. 3:12-cv-597 (JBA), 2013 WL 12303038, at *1 (D. Conn. Jan. 3, 2013) ("[T]he statutory time limit is mandatory and absent a finding of waiver or estoppel, federal courts rigorously enforce the statute's thirty-day filing requirement.") (quotation marks and citation omitted). And even in those circumstances where a later removal period is contemplated, see 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(3), a case is not, save for special circumstances not present here, removable on the basis of diversity jurisdiction more than one year after the action is filed in state court, see id. 1446(c)(1). Again, this foreclosure action was filed in 2014. Accordingly, this matter is remanded back to the Connecticut Superior Court, judicial district of Fairfield at Bridgeport. Royal Ins. Co. v. Jones, 76 F. Supp. 2d 202, 204 (D. Conn. 1999) ("[A] court lacking subject matter jurisdiction over a removed action must remand that action to state court sua sponte or on motion"); see United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 919, AFL-CIO v. CenterMark Props. Meriden Square, Inc., 30 F.3d 298, 301 (2d Cir. 1994) (recognizing that lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised sua sponte by the Court and that "[w]here jurisdiction is lacking... dismissal is mandatory"). The Clerk of the Court is directed to: (1) remand this matter to the Connecticut Superior Court, judicial district of Fairfield at Bridgeport, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1447(c), and (2) close this case. Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 11/13/2019. (Cahill, Leslie)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of #1 Notice of Removal filed by Beverley Donald, #3 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Beverley Donald, #5 Standing Protective Order, #4 Electronic Filing Order Signed by Clerk on 11/12/2019. (Attachments: #1 Removal Standing Order)(Fazekas, J.) |
|
Filing 5
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 11/12/2019.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 4
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 11/12/2019.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 3
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 1/11/2020. Discovery due by 5/13/2020. Dispositive Motions due by 6/17/2020. Signed by Clerk on 11/12/2019.(Fazekas, J.)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Beverley Donald. (Fazekas, J.) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Beverley Donald from Superior Court Stamford-Norwalk, case number FBT-CV-14-6047487-S., filed by Beverley Donald. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Fazekas, J.) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
