Cox

(UD) (PS) TC the Confluence LP v. Cox

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 20222:22-cv-01567California769 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TC THE CONFLUENCE LP, a California No. 2:22-cv-01567-TLN-AC limited partnership, 12 Plaintiff, SUA SPONTE REMAND ORDER v. 14 TRISTANNA COX and CHARLES COX, SR., Defendants. 17 This matter is before the Court on Defendants Tristanna Cox and Charles Cox’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Notice of Removal and Motions to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1–3.) For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ Motions to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (ECF Nos. 2, 3) are DENIED as moot, and the Court hereby REMANDS the action to the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. /// /// /// /// /// /// I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On May 31, 2022, Plaintiff TC The Confluence LP (“Plaintiff”) brought an action for unlawful detainer against Defendants for possession of real property known as 3142 Occidental Drive #16, Sacramento, California, 95826 (the “Property”). (ECF No. 1 at 6.) …

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.