Anderson v. Anderson

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1) Action is REMANDED to Circuit Court in Clark County. 2) Clerk shall mail a certified copy of this Memo Opinion and Order to Clark Circuit Court referencing case number 17-CI-133. 3) Action is STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 5/22/2017.(SCD)cc: COR,Pro Se Dft(via US Mail), Clark Circuit Court(certified copy via US Mail)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION at LEXINGTON MARY ELLEN ANDERSON, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, V. ARTIS ANDERSON, et al., Defendants. *** Artis Proceeding Anderson without is an *** a Civil No. 17-221-JMH MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER *** resident attorney, *** of Winchester, Anderson filed a Kentucky. three-page “Notice of Removal” in which he apparently seeks to remove a civil case from the Circuit Court in Clark County, Kentucky to this Court. [R. 1] However, Anderson’s Notice of Removal is legally insufficient and, therefore, the Court will remand this case to the Clark County Circuit Court. As an initial matter, Anderson’s submission does not comply with the procedures for removal of civil actions. Indeed, Anderson did not attach to his Notice of Removal “a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon” him, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446. Plus, while Anderson claims that “[t]his Court has original jurisdiction” [R. 1 at 2], he has not demonstrated in any clear way that this Court actually does have subject matter jurisdiction in this case. Instead, Anderson makes a series of inexplicable statements in which he suggests that the appointment of a guardian for his wife violated his “federal and international rights” including the Fourteenth Amendment, the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” and Political Rights.” the “International [R. 1 at 1-2] Covenant on Civil and As best as the Court can tell, this matter relates to a case that Anderson previously filed with this Court in which he challenged the validity of a state court order placing his spouse in guardianship; the Court dismissed that case for lack of jurisdiction. See Anderson v. Wiley, et al., No: 5: 16-cv-034-DCR (E.D. Ky. 2016). Ultimately, Anderson is required to show that this Court has original jurisdiction, see Eastman v. Marine Mech. Corp., 438 F.3d 544, 549 (6th Cir. 2006), and he has not met that burden. In light of the foregoing deficiencies, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. This action is REMANDED to the Circuit Court in Clark County, Kentucky as it was improvidently removed. 2. The Clerk of the Court shall mail a certified copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Clark County, Kentucky, referencing its case number, 17-CI-00133. 3. This action is STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court. 2 This 22nd day of May, 2017. 3

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?