Opinion
Case No. ED CV 12-1762-CAS-(Ex)
02-05-2013
KENRICK OLIVE v. DAVID MARIN GONZALEZ, et al.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Not present Attorneys Present for Defendants Not present
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Present: The Honorable CHRISTINA A. SNYDER
+--------------------------------------------------+ ¦Catherine Jeang¦Not Present ¦N/A ¦ +---------------+-------------------------+--------¦ ¦Deputy Clerk ¦Court Reporter / Recorder¦Tape No.¦ +--------------------------------------------------+
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:
Not present
Attorneys Present for Defendants
Not present
Proceedings: (In Chambers:) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED
I. INTRODUCTION
On October 12, 2012, plaintiff Kenrick Olive filed a quiet title action in this Court against defendants David Marin Gonzalez and Sheryl Baez. Dkt. No. 1. Plaintiff alleges that defendants failed to pay an $850 debt owed to plaintiff for cleaning defendants' front yard, and therefore plaintiff filed a lis pendens against defendants' property to secure the debt. Plaintiff also asserts an adverse possession claim to the property in question based upon his taking up residence there. Id.
On January 9, 2013, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") filed a motion to expunge the lis pendens that plaintiff had recorded in the official records of San Bernardino County. Dkt. No. 5. Neither plaintiff nor defendants have filed a response to Freddie Mac's motion.
II. ANALYSIS
Plaintiff's complaint fails to state the grounds for this Court's jurisdiction, as required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 8(a)(1), which alone requires dismissal of plaintiff's complaint. In addition, it appears that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action on the basis of a federal question or diversity of citizenship. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. First, plaintiff's claim does not appear to present a federal question under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, because a claim for quiet title arises solely under state law. Second, neither plaintiff's citizenship nor the amount in controversy are apparent from the face of plaintiff's complaint. Plaintiff's only allegation is that he is owed $850, which is insufficient to satisfy the amount in controversy requirement.
III. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE on or before February 25, 2013, why the instant action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and the lis pendens expunged. The Court hereby continues the hearing on Freddie Mac's motion to expunge to March 4, 2013 at 10:00 A.M.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
00 : 00
Initials of Preparer CMJ