3100 Van Buren Boulevard Apartments Investors LLC v. Dasia Jones

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaNovember 19, 20195:19-cv-02182California1,140 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

JS-6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 3100 VAN BUREN BOULEVARD

CASE NUMBER:

APARTMENTS INVESTORS LLC, EDCV 19-2182-ODW (KKx) Plaintiff v. DASIA JONES, ET AL.,

ORDER REMANDING CASE TO

STATE COURT 15 Defendant(s). 16 The Court sua sponte REMANDS this action to the California Superior Court for the 18 County of R i v e r s i d e for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as set forth below. “The right of removal is entirely a creature of statute and ‘a suit commenced in a state 20 court must remain there until cause is shown for its transfer under some act of Congress.’” 21 Syngenta Crop Prot., Inc. v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28, 32 (2002) (quoting Great N. Ry. Co. v. 22 Alexander, 246 U.S. 276, 280 (1918)). Generally, where Congress has acted to create a right of 23 removal, those statutes are strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Id.; Nevada v. Bank of 24 Am. Corp., 672 F.3d 661, 667 (9th Cir.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.