From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robinson v. Lineberger

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
Nov 21, 2022
3:21-cv-622-MOC-DSC (W.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 2022)

Opinion

3:21-cv-622-MOC-DSC

11-21-2022

BETTY JEAN ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. VINCENT LINEBERGER, Defendant.


ORDER

MAX O. COGBURN. JR, DISTRICT JUDGE

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Vincent Lineberger's two pro se Motions to Stay the Court's Order on Motion to Remand to State Court. (Doc. Nos. 10, 11).

Defendant's Motions to Stay (Doc. Nos. 10, 11) are DENIED as moot because this action has already been remanded, so this Court no longer has jurisdiction. To the extent that the Court interprets the motions as motions for reconsideration, the Court denies the motions because this action was properly remanded to state court. The magistrate judge correctly found that removal was improper because there is no federal question jurisdiction and diversity of citizenship is lacking.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Robinson v. Lineberger

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
Nov 21, 2022
3:21-cv-622-MOC-DSC (W.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 2022)
Case details for

Robinson v. Lineberger

Case Details

Full title:BETTY JEAN ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. VINCENT LINEBERGER, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division

Date published: Nov 21, 2022

Citations

3:21-cv-622-MOC-DSC (W.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 2022)