Cassandra Fry v. Brennan Wimbish

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:14-cv-03875-DKC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999550094]. Mailed to: CASSANDRA JEAN FRY. [15-1044]

Appeal: 15-1044

Doc: 9

Filed: 03/20/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1044

CASSANDRA JEAN FRY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
C.S.J.W.,
Plaintiff,
v.
BRENNAN WIMBISH;
ASSOCIATES,

CHRISTY

A.

ZLATKUS;

J.B.

MEALY

AND

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District
Judge. (8:14-cv-03875-DKC)

Submitted:

March 17, 2015

Decided:

March 20, 2015

Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cassandra Jean Fry, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1044

Doc: 9

Filed: 03/20/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Cassandra
remanding

Jean

this

Fry

removed

appeals
action

the
to

district

state

court

jurisdiction and denying reconsideration.

court’s
for

orders

lack

of

An order remanding a

case to state court is generally not reviewable on appeal or
otherwise.

28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2012).

The Supreme Court has

limited the scope of § 1447(d), prohibiting appellate review of
remand orders based on a defect in the removal procedure or lack
of subject matter jurisdiction.
Co.,

517

(2012).

U.S.

706,

711-12

Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins.

(1996);

see

28

U.S.C.

§

1447(c)

In this case, remand was based on lack of subject

matter jurisdiction over a child custody dispute.
Accordingly,
jurisdiction.

we

dismiss

the

appeal

for

lack

of

We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

2