From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Township of Marple v. Goodhill Associates

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Nov 24, 2008
CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-4774 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 24, 2008)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-4774.

November 24, 2008


ORDER


AND NOW, this ___ 21st ___ day of November, 2008, it is ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County.

Regarding a case that has been removed, 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) provides that "[i]f at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded." Here, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because no diversity exists and the complaint raises no federal question. Plaintiff argues that this Court may exercise federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because Defendants' counterclaim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 raises a federal question. The Supreme Court has clearly held, however, that a federal counterclaim does not create federal-question jurisdiction under § 1331. Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Sys., Inc., 535 U.S. 826, 832 (2002).


Summaries of

Township of Marple v. Goodhill Associates

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Nov 24, 2008
CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-4774 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 24, 2008)
Case details for

Township of Marple v. Goodhill Associates

Case Details

Full title:TOWNSHIP OF MARPLE, Plaintiff. v. GOODHILL ASSOCIATES, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Nov 24, 2008

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-4774 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 24, 2008)