Mapleton Commons, LLC v. Sharlene Goldman
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
JS-6 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MAPLETON COMMONS, LLC, CASE NUMBER:
10 ED CV 20-41-JGB (SPx) Plaintiff v. 13 |} SHARLENE GOLDMAN, et al.,
ORDER REMANDING CASE TO
STATE COURT Ae Defendant(s). 16 The Court sua sponte REMANDS this action to the California Superior Court for the 18 County of Riverside 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 court must remain there until cause is shown for its transfer under some act of Congress.” 21 || Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28, 32 (2002) (quoting Great Northern R. Co. Alexander, 246 U.S. 276, 280 (1918)). Where Congress has acted to create a right of removal, 23 || those statutes are strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Id.; Nevada vy. Bank of America 24 …