CAH 2014-2 Borrower, LLC v. Pickney
Filing
5
OPINION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Linda T. Walkers Final Report and Recommendation 3 and remanding this case to the Magistrate Court of Fulton County. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 12/13/16. (ddm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
CAH 2014-2 BORROWER, LLC
Plaintiff,
v.
1:16-cv-3764-WSD
CHASTITY PICKNEY and ALL
OTHERS,
Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Linda T. Walker’s Final
Report and Recommendation [3] (“R&R”). The R&R recommends the Court
remand this action to the Magistrate Court of Fulton County.
I.
BACKGROUND
In September 2016, Plaintiff CAH 2014-2 Borrower, LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed
a dispossessory proceeding in the Magistrate Court of Fulton County to evict
Defendant Chastity Pickney (“Defendant”) and all others from the property at
750 Stillrock Drive, Atlanta, Georgia 30331 (the “Property”), for failure to pay
rent. ([1.1] at 4). Plaintiff sought possession, a small amount in unpaid rent, and
court costs. (Id.). On October 11, 2016, Defendant filed her application for leave
to proceed in forma pauperis and notice of removal in this Court. ([1.1] at 1-3).
Defendant argues in the removal papers that the Court has jurisdiction over the
matter because Plaintiff’s actions violated federal law. ([1.1] at 1-2).
On November 3, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued her R&R. The R&R
recommends the Court remand this action to the Magistrate Court of Fulton
County, because the Court lacks jurisdiction over this action. Plaintiff did not file
any objections to the R&R.
II.
DISCUSSION
A.
Legal Standard
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams
v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983).
Where, as here, no party objects to the R&R, the Court conducts a plain error
review of the record. See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir.
1983).
B.
Analysis
The “well-pleaded complaint” rule provides that federal jurisdiction exists
only when a federal question is presented on the face of the state court plaintiff’s
properly-pleaded complaint. See Gully v. First Nat’l Bank, 299 U.S. 109, 112-13
2
(1936); see also Anderson v. Household Fin. Corp., 900 F. Supp. 386, 388 (M.D.
Ala. 1995). A federal cause of action within a counterclaim or a federal defense is
not a basis for removal jurisdiction. See Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S.
386, 392 (1987). The Magistrate Judge found that the pleadings do not present any
federal question, and the Court lacks federal subject matter jurisdiction over this
action. The Magistrate Judge also found that diversity jurisdiction does not exist,
because the parties appear to be citizens of Georgia and the amount in controversy
does not satisfy the jurisdictional limit. Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge
recommends the Court remand this action to the Magistrate Court of Fulton
County. The Court finds no plain error in these findings and recommendation, and
this action is remanded to the Magistrate Court of Fulton County. See Slay,
714 F.2d at 1095.
III.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Linda T. Walker’s Final
Report and Recommendation [3] is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is REMANDED to the
Magistrate Court of Fulton County.
3
SO ORDERED this 13th day of December, 2016.
4
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?