John Driscoll, III v. Sandra Forquer

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999904336-2]; granting Motion to dismiss appeal [999916635-2] Originating case number: 1:16-cv-02555-ELH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999976637]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-1879]

Appeal: 16-1879

Doc: 17

Filed: 11/29/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1879

JOHN E. DRISCOLL, III; LAURA D. HARRIS; DANIEL J. PESACHOWITZ;
DEENA L. REYNOLDS, Substitute Trustee,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v.
SANDRA S. FORQUER,
Defendant – Appellant,
and
BARBARA S. FORQUER,
Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge.
(1:16-cv-02555-ELH)

Submitted:

November 22, 2016

Decided:

November 29, 2016

Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sandra S. Forquer, Appellant Pro Se.
Douglas Brooks Riley,
TREANOR, POPE & HUGHES, PA, Towson, Maryland, for Appellees.

Appeal: 16-1879

Doc: 17

Filed: 11/29/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-1879

Doc: 17

Filed: 11/29/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Sandra S. Forquer seeks to appeal the district court’s order
remanding this removed action to the state court for lack of
jurisdiction.

With certain exceptions not applicable here, “[a]n

order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed
is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise.”
(2012).

28 U.S.C. § 1447(d)

The Supreme Court has limited the scope of § 1447(d) to

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).
subject

matter

Here, the remand was based on lack of

jurisdiction.

Accordingly,

this

jurisdiction to review the district court’s order.
deny

Forquer

leave

to

proceed

in

forma

Appellees’ motion to dismiss the appeal.

court

lacks

We therefore

pauperis

and

grant

We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3