John Howard, Sr. v. Starsha Sewell

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying motion transfer case [999720415-2] Originating case number: 8:15-cv-01539-PWG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999795250]. Mailed to: appellant and David A. Wanger.. [15-2421]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-2421 Doc: 14 Filed: 04/14/2016 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2421 JOHN HOWARD, SR., Plaintiff – Appellee, v. STARSHA M. SEWELL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paul W. Grimm, District Judge. (8:15cv-01539-PWG) Submitted: April 11, 2016 Before DUNCAN Circuit Judge. and DIAZ, Decided: Circuit Judges, and April 14, 2016 DAVIS, Senior Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Starsha Sewell, Appellant Pro Se. David A. Wanger, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID WANGER, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-2421 Doc: 14 Filed: 04/14/2016 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Starsha remanding Sewell this appeals removed the action district to state court’s court for orders lack jurisdiction and denying the motion for reconsideration. order remanding a case to state court is generally of An not reviewable on appeal or otherwise. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2012). The the Supreme Court has limited scope of § 1447(d), prohibiting appellate review of remand orders based on a defect in the removal procedure or lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 517 U.S. 706, 711-12 (1996); see 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) (2012). Here, remand was based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction. appeal for want of jurisdiction. and dispense with oral argument Accordingly, we dismiss the We deny the motion to transfer 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

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.


Why Is My Information Online?