Slavin et al v. Cameron

Filing 5

Judge Richard G. Stearns: ORDER entered denying 4 Motion leave to file notice of removal. This case shall be remanded to the Boston Housing Court. (PSSA, 3)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-10084-RGS
MICHAEL SLAVIN, et al.
v.
HELEN CAMERON
ORDER
Janaury 15, 2015
STEARNS, D.J.
For the reasons stated below, the Court remands this action to the Boston Housing Court.
On January 12, 2015, Helen Cameron, acting pro se filed a motion for leave to file a
notice of removal and a notice of removal. She is attempting to remove a criminal action
pending against her in the Boston Housing Court (case number 14H84CR000495) to this Court.
As grounds for the removal, she argues that “[i]t is common knowledge that Boston Housing
Court arbitrarily and capriciously rules in favor of any plaintiff in matters involving a Landlord
as defendant. For these reasons, the defendant feels she will benefit by higher procedural
standards and safeguards of a federal tribunal less subject to the emotionalism of the Boston
Housing Court.” (docket entry #1, ¶ 1). She includes a list of allegedly improper actions by the
Boston Housing Court, including denying her counsel, not allowing her to file a countercomplaint, failing to provide proper notice of a probable cause hearing, and denying disability
accommodations. Other than identifying herself as a landlord, Cameron does not indicate the
nature of the criminal charges against her.
She states that she is removing this case pursuant to a provision of the 1934 version of
28 U.S.C. § 74, which provided for removal “[w]hen any civil suit or criminal prosecution is
commenced in any State court, for any cause whatsoever, against any person who is denied or
cannot enforce in the judicial tribunals of the State . . . where such suit or prosecution is pending,
any right secured to him by any law providing for the equal civil rights of citizens of the United

States.” 28 U.S.C. § 74. The current version of this statute1, codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1) (“§
1443(1)”), provides for removal of a state prosecution “[a]gainst any person who is denied or
cannot enforce in the courts of such State a right under any law providing for the equal civil
rights of citizens of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1).
To qualify for removal under § 1443(1), “the right allegedly denied the removal
petitioner [must] arise[] under a federal law ‘providing for specific civil rights stated in terms of
racial equality.’” Johnson v. Mississippi, 421 U.S. 213, 219 (1975) (quoting Georgia v. Rachel,
384 U.S. 780, 792 (1966)); see also Murphy v. Molino, 45 F.3d 423, 1995 WL 32646, at *1 (1st
Cir. Jan. 30, 1995) (unpublished) (per curiam) (equal rights provision of § 1443(1) relates to
racial equality). Prosecutions are removable under § 1443(1) only in “the rare situations where it
can be clearly predicted by reason of the operation of a pervasive and explicitly state or federal
law that those rights will inevitably be denied by the very act of bringing the defendant to trial in
the state court.” City of Greenwood v. Peacock, 384 U.S. 808, 828 (1966).
Cameron has not made any showing that her right under a law providing for racial
equality will “inevitably be denied” in the state court prosecution. While she may prefer a
federal forum, federal law does not provide for the removal of the prosecution against her. The
Court therefore lacks jurisdiction over the criminal proceeding.
Accordingly, the motion for leave to file a notice of removal is DENIED. This case shall
be remanded to the Boston Housing Court. The Clerk shall send a copy of this order to the Clerk
of the Boston Housing Court.

SO ORDERED.
/s/ Richard G. Stearns
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

For an overview of the evolution of this statute, see Baines v. City of Danville, 357 F.2d
756, 759-761 (4th Cir. 1966)
2