Opinion
Case No.: 8:11-cv-791-T-24-TGW.
September 20, 2011
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff Daniel T. Hester's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs. (Doc. No. 11). Defendant Florida Capital Group, Inc. filed a response in opposition to the motion. (Doc. No. 12).
The Supreme Court articulated the standard by which district courts are to consider the appropriateness of awarding attorneys' fees following improper removal in Martin v. Franklin Capital Corporation: "Absent unusual circumstances, courts may award attorney's fees under [28 U.S.C.] § 1447(c) only where the removing party lacked an objectively reasonable basis for seeking removal. Conversely, when an objectively reasonable basis exists, fees should be denied." 546 U.S. 132, 141 (2005).
On June 29, 2011, the Court found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims and remanded the action to state court. (Doc. No. 10). Though Defendant's basis for removal was improper, it was not objectively unreasonable. And there are no unusual circumstances present in this case that would otherwise justify an award of attorneys' fees.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (Doc. No. 11) is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida.