Presto et al v. Presto
| Teodozja Presto, Andrzej Mazurek and Stanislaus Mazurek |
| Charles Presto |
| 3:2023cv00668 |
| May 22, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Vanessa L Bryant |
| S Dave Vatti |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Case remanded to State Court: Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk. (Shafer, J.) |
Filing 24
ORDER denying as moot #22 Motion to Stay and #23 Motion for Clarification. On June 29, 2023, the Court granted the Plaintiff's motion to remand and remanded this case to state court. This means that the case is no longer pending before the United States District Court, but is before the Connecticut state court. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 7/5/2023. (Burlingham, Corinne)
|
| Filing 23 MOTION for Clarification As to Competency by Charles Presto. (Presto, Charles) |
| Filing 22 MOTION to Stay Proceedings and Timelines by Charles Presto.Responses due by 7/24/2023 (Presto, Charles) |
|
Filing 21
ORDER finding as moot #17 First MOTION for More Definite Statement. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 06/29/2023. (Lee, Elisabeth)
|
|
Filing 20
ORDER granting #13 First MOTION to Remand to State Court. Plaintiffs brought state statutory and common law vexatious litigation claims against Defendant in state court. Defendant removed this case on two grounds: (1) that the Court had diversity jurisdiction over the case because the parties resided in different states and the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, 28 U.S.C. 1332; and (2) that "a federal question has arisen implicitly" because he believes the Clerk of the Stamford Superior Court's e-services rules and regulations deprive him of his due process and equal protection rights. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that this case must be remanded. First, the Court does not have diversity jurisdiction over this case, because Plaintiffs stipulate that the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000. Second, Defendant is incorrect that "a federal question has arisen implicitly." It is well-established that "a federal court does not have original jurisdiction over a case in which the complaint presents a state-law cause of action, but also asserts that federal law deprives the defendant of a defense he may raise, or that a federal defense the defendant may raise is not sufficient to defeat the claim." Franchise Tax Bd. of State of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for S. Cal., 463 U.S. 1, 10 (1983) (internal citations removed); see Garanti Finansal Kiralama A.S. v. Aqua Marine & Trading Inc., 697 F.3d 59, 67 (2d Cir. 2012). Accordingly, the Court does not have valid subject matter jurisdiction over this case and must remand it to state court. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 06/29/2023. (Lee, Elisabeth)
|
| 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 (Shafer, J.) |
| Filing 19 RESPONSE TO MOTION TO REMAND filed by Charles Presto. (Presto, Charles) |
| Filing 18 ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) by Charles Presto.(Presto, Charles) |
| Filing 17 First MOTION for More Definite Statement by Charles Presto.Responses due by 7/13/2023 (Presto, Charles) |
|
Filing 16
ORDER granting #15 First MOTION for Extension of Time until June 22, 2023 to file an answer for good cause shown. See D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 7(b). Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 06/16/2023. (Lee, Elisabeth)
|
| Answer deadline updated to 6-22-2023 per Dkt. 16 Order. (Shafer, J.) |
| Filing 15 First MOTION for Extension of Time until June 22, 2023 to file an answer by Charles Presto. (Presto, Charles) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE: Disclosure Statement Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 (Civil Action) by Charles Presto (Gaskins, A.) |
| Filing fee received from Charles Presto: $ 402.00, receipt number CTXB13728(Pesta, J.) Modified on 6/9/2023 to add receipt number (Corriette, M.). |
| Filing 13 First MOTION to Remand to State Court by Andrzej Mazurek, Stanislaus Mazurek, Teodozja Presto.Responses due by 6/28/2023 (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support)(Lathouris, Peter) |
|
Filing 12
Electronic filing order - please ensure compliance with courtesy copy requirements in this order. Self-represented filers are required to comply with the attached standard Electronic Filing Order. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 5-31-2023. (Shafer, J.)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER granting #9 MOTION for SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT TO PARTICIPATE IN ELECTRONIC FILING. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 05/31/2023. (Lee, Elisabeth)
|
| Filing 10 NOTICE: STATEMENT REGARDING STANDING ORDER by Charles Presto (Attachments: #1 attachment, #2 envelope) (Gaskins, A.) |
| Filing 9 MOTION for SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT TO PARTICIPATE IN ELECTRONIC FILING by Charles Presto. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (Gaskins, A.) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER RE: Judge's Chambers Practices. Counsel are directed to read and comply with the Chambers Practices and Standing Orders prior to filing any document. So ordered Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 5/22/2023. (Gaskins, A.)
|
|
Filing 7
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 5/22/2023. (Gaskins, A.)
|
|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 5/22/2023. (Gaskins, A.)
|
|
Filing 5
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 7/22/2023 Discovery due by 11/22/2023 Dispositive Motions due by 12/27/2023 Signed by Clerk on 5/22/2023. (Gaskins, A.)
|
| Filing 4 Appearance Self Represented Party by Charles Presto. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing 3 Notice: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1, a disclosure statement must be filed with a party's first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the Court and must be supplemented if any required information changes during the case. Signed by Clerk on 5/22/2023. (Fanelle, N.) |
|
Filing 2
ORDER: We received your Notice of Removal which has been assigned case number 3:23-cv-00668. In order to proceed, the filing fee or a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis must be submitted to the Court by 6/21/2023 or the case will be subject to dismissal. Fee information and the Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis form may be found on the Court's website at ctd.uscourts.gov. Dismissal due by 6/21/2023. Signed by Clerk on 5/22/2023. (Fanelle, N.)
|
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Charles Presto from Superior Court of the State of Connecticut for the Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford, case number FST-CV23-6059412-S, filed by Charles Presto. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Judge Vanessa L. Bryant and Judge S. Dave Vatti added. (Oliver, T.) |
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.
