NH Department of Health and Human Services, Division for Children, Youth and Families v. Katz et al

Filing 8

ORDER Signed by Judge Steven J. McAuliffe. (jar, )

NH Department of Health and Human Services, Division for Children, Youth and Families v. Katz et al

Doc. 8

Case 1:06-cv-00148-SM

Document 8

Filed 04/28/2006

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, Division for Children, Youth and Families, and Brian Murphy, Child Protective Service Worker, Plaintiffs v. Elena Katz and Arnold Grodman, Defendants ORDER Civil No. 06-cv-148-SM

On April 11, 2006, the State of New Hampshire filed a petition for abuse or neglect with regard to Eleonora Grodman, a minor child. In the Matter of Eleonora Grodman, Case No. 2006

J119, New Hampshire Superior Court, Brentwood Family Division. The proceeding is civil in nature, and is designed to protect children, not punish parents. Parents who allegedly abuse or

neglect their children are brought before the court not as criminal defendants but as parties to a civil action.

Eleonora's parents, Elena Katz and Arnold Grodman, are said to have abused or neglected Eleanora, and appear to have been duly served with the petition and a summons, but, in any event,

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:06-cv-00148-SM

Document 8

Filed 04/28/2006

Page 2 of 3

have actual notice of the proceeding.

Indeed, they have filed a

notice of removal, seeking to bring the proceeding before this court.

Having reviewed the papers filed, it is apparent that no basis exists upon which this court could possibly exercise federal jurisdiction over this matter. The asserted basis for

removal jurisdiction - federal question - is facially without merit. The abuse or neglect proceeding relates exclusively to A

state law concerns and involves no issue of federal law.

defendant may not remove a case to federal court unless the complaint in state court establishes that the case "arises under" federal law, or other jurisdictional factors, not relevant here (e.g., diversity of citizenship, federal preemption, etc.), warrant the exercise of jurisdiction. See Franchise Tax Bd. v. It

Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 10 (1983).

is not enough that a federal claim might be asserted as a defense or counterclaim in the state proceeding.

Conclusion This case is remanded to the New Hampshire Superior Court, as there is no legitimate basis for removal. Defendants'

2

Case 1:06-cv-00148-SM

Document 8

Filed 04/28/2006

Page 3 of 3

petition to proceed in forma pauperis with respect to the removal petition is granted.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________ Steven J. McAuliffe Chief Judge April 28, 2006 cc: Elena Katz, pro se Arnold Grodman, pro se

3