Elizabeth McVicker et al v. County of Riverside Board of Supervisors

Filing 14

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REMANDING ACTION FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION TO RIVERSIDE SUPERIOR COURT by Judge Josephine L. Staton. Accordingly, because there are no federal causes of action and this suit does not belong to the narro w category of cases that arise under federal law even though there are only state law causes of action, the Court hereby REMANDS this entire action to the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside, Case No. MCC1700848. Case Terminated. Made JS-6 (es)

JS-6
____________________________________________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 5:17-cv-01661-JLS-SS
Date: September 12, 2017
Title: Elizabeth McVicker et al v. County of Riverside Board of Supervisors

Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Terry Guerrero
Deputy Clerk
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF:
Not Present

N/A
Court Reporter
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:
Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REMANDING ACTION FOR
LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION TO
RIVERSIDE SUPERIOR COURT
Before the Court are the parties’ responses to the Court’s OSC on subject matter
jurisdiction. (Response, Doc. 12; Response, Doc. 13.) In its Response, the County of
Riverside, which removed this suit, “respectfully requests that its Notice of Removal be
withdrawn and that this matter be remanded to the Riverside County Superior Court.”
(Riverside OSC Response at 2, Doc. 12.) Plaintiffs Elizabeth and Timothy McVicker
oppose a remand, but their OSC does not adequately explain how this Court has federal
question jurisdiction. (Plaintiffs’ OSC Response at 2–3.) Plaintiffs do not contend that
they bring suit under a cause of action created by federal law. They also acknowledge
that “[t]his is not one of the ‘special and small category’ of cases that ‘arise under’
federal law even though the action might plead only state law causes of action.’” (Id. at
3.) Although Plaintiffs claim in the next sentence of their Response that a federal
constitutional question is “necessarily raised,” they do not explain how this could be true
when Plaintiffs allege both state and federal constitutional sources for their due process
and equal protection rights. (Id. at 4.)
Accordingly, because there are no federal causes of action and this suit does not
belong to the narrow category of cases that “arise under” federal law even though there

______________________________________________________________________________
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
1

____________________________________________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 5:17-cv-01661-JLS-SS
Date: September 12, 2017
Title: Elizabeth McVicker et al v. County of Riverside Board of Supervisors

are only state law causes of action, the Court hereby REMANDS this entire action to the
Superior Court of California, County of Riverside, Case No. MCC1700848.
Initials of Preparer: tg

______________________________________________________________________________
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
2