KIBLER et al v. TURCOTTE

Filing 10

ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO REMAND re: 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; 6 Motion to Remand to State Court By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mjlt)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
GLENN KIBLER AND
MAUREEN KIBLER,
PLAINTIFFS
V.

GINA TURCOTTE,
DEFENDANT

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL NO. 1:16-CV-436-DBH

ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
AND ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND
The defendant’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED
and the plaintiffs’ motion to remand is GRANTED. This court has no subject
matter jurisdiction. There is no diversity of citizenship, and it is apparent from
the state court complaint that this state court forcible entry and detainer lawsuit
states no federal claim. Any federal defenses that the defendant may have do
not give this court jurisdiction. See Roy v. Turcotte, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12990
(D. Me. Jan. 29, 2015); Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 393 (1987).
SO ORDERED.
DATED THIS 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016
/S/D. BROCK HORNBY
D. BROCK HORNBY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE