From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ENKS Enters. Inc. v. Greve

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 18, 2011
Case No. SA CV 11-1285 DOC (RNBx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. SA CV 11-1285 DOC (RNBx)

10-18-2011

ENKS ENTERPRISES INC. AS TRUSTEE FOR MARBURY TRUST #1008 v. TIMOTHY GREVE

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS: NONE PRESENT ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS: NONE PRESENT


CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

DOCKET ENTRY

[I hereby certify that this document was served by first class mail or Government messenger service, postage prepaid, to all counsel (or parties) at their respective most recent address of record in this action on this date.]

Deputy Clerk: _____________

PRESENT:

THE HONORABLE DAVID O. CARTER , JUDGE

+-------------------------------+ ¦Julie Barrera ¦Not Present ¦ +----------------+--------------¦ ¦Courtroom Clerk ¦Court Reporter¦ +-------------------------------+

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS: NONE PRESENT

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS: NONE PRESENT

PROCEEDING (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE REMAND FOR IMPROPER REMOVAL

On August 26, 2011 Defendant removed this action to this Court. However, the Notice of Removal (the "Notice") does not adequately allege federal question jurisdiction with the Court. In the Notice, Defendant fails to allege that Plaintiff's complaint alleges or pleads any claim raising a federal question. The face of the Complaint states only one cause of action: Unlawful Detainer. Unlawful Detainer actions arise under state, not federal, law. See Cal. Code. Civ. P. § 1161. Defendant instead alleges that the Court has federal question jurisdiction because Defendant raises federal questions relating to Article III common law issues. However, as the existence of federal question jurisdiction is determined by reference to the complaint, not to any asserted defenses, Defendant cannot show that the Court has federal question jurisdiction over this action. Therefore, the Notice fails to adequately claim proper federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

Accordingly, Defendant Timothy Greve is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by November 1, 2011: (1) why this action should not be remanded to Orange County Superior Court for improper removal.

The Clerk shall serve this minute order on all parties to the action.


Summaries of

ENKS Enters. Inc. v. Greve

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 18, 2011
Case No. SA CV 11-1285 DOC (RNBx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2011)
Case details for

ENKS Enters. Inc. v. Greve

Case Details

Full title:ENKS ENTERPRISES INC. AS TRUSTEE FOR MARBURY TRUST #1008 v. TIMOTHY GREVE

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 18, 2011

Citations

Case No. SA CV 11-1285 DOC (RNBx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 18, 2011)