ELIAS MALLOUK REALTY v. INGRIS et al

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM ORDER granting Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis; Ordering the Clerk of Court shall file the Notice of Removal; Remanding this Action to Superior Court of New Jersey. Signed by Judge Michael A. Shipp on 3/27/2015. (eaj)

RECE!VED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

MAR 2 7 2015
I

AT 8:30
WILLIAM T. WALSH
CLERI'(

Elias Mallouk Realty Corp.,
Plaintiff,

Civil Action No. 15-2138 (MAS) (LHO!)

v.
MEMORANDUM ORDER ON
APPLICATION TO PROCEED
WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FEE:S

Peter Ingris, et al.,
Defendants.

This matter comes before the Court on the application of Defendant Peter lngris to proceed
without prepayment of fees under 28 U.S. C. § 1915. (ECF No. 1-11.) The Court will grant lhe
application on the strength ofDefendant's allegation of indigence but Defendant's removal ofJhis
action was improper and the Court will sua sponte remand this action back to state court.
On March 18, 2015, Defendant filed a Notice of Removal seeking to remove a New Jerrsey
state court action, docket number SOM-L-1542-14, (the "State Court Action") and an
"administrative proceeding, In re Ciccone v. Ingris."

(ECF No. 1.) This Court previously

I

remanded the State Court Action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (ECF Nos. 8, 9, 14-4305),
I

and denied Defendant's later motion to amend the remand order on jurisdictional grounds (BCF
No. 13, 14-4305). Defendant now asserts that removal is proper, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1f43
and 1446, based on a recent Warrant for Eviction entered in the State Court Action. "[R]em,oval
statutes are to be strictly construed against removal andall doubts should be resolved in fawf of
remand." A.S. ex rel. Miller v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 769 F.3d 204, 208 (3d Cir. 2014)
(internal quotations omitted). Defendant attempts, again, to relate the State Court Actiol. a
landlord tenant dispute, to an unrelated discrimination case, Ingris v. Drexler, et. a!., 14-

M

2404 (ES) (MAR). 1 As the Court already stated, the allegations in the State Court Action, related
to a subsequent tenancy in Hillsborough, are unrelated to the race-based conspiracy Defen!t
alleges in his discrimination suit. This analysis does not change based solely on the state cpL
entering a Warrant of Eviction.

IT IS on this 27th day of March, 2015, ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby granted pursuartt to

28 U.S.C. § 1915;
2.

The Clerk of the Court shall file the Notice of Removal without prepayment of fees

or security;
3.

This action is remanded to the Superior Court of New Jersey; and

4.

The Clerk of the Court shall mark this matter CLOSED.

s/ Michael A. Shipp
MICHAEL A. SHIPP

.
.I

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG:E

1

An analysis of this unrelated action, and overview of multiple other actions in the District ofNIew
Jersey in which Defendant is a party, can be found in this Court's prior Opinion. (ECF No.8, 144305.)
2