US Bank v. Green

Full title: US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TRACIE L. GREEN…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Oct 2, 2023

No. 23-1176 (4th Cir. Oct. 2, 2023)

Opinion

23-1176

10-02-2023

US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TRACIE L. GREEN, a/k/a Tracie Ledora Mitchem-Green, Defendant-Appellant, and CARDINAL PINES HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC.; PALMETTO CITIZENS FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Defendants.

Tracie L. Green, Appellant Pro Se. John S. Kay, HUTCHENS LAW FIRM, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM:

UNPUBLISHED

Submitted: September 28, 2023

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Sherri A. Lydon, District Judge. (3:22-cv-04215-SAL)

Tracie L. Green, Appellant Pro Se.

John S. Kay, HUTCHENS LAW FIRM, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tracie L. Green seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation and remanding Appellee's action against her to the state court from which it was removed. The district court remanded the case after determining that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. "Congress has placed broad restrictions on the power of federal appellate courts to review district court orders remanding removed cases to state court." Doe v. Blair, 819 F.3d 64, 66 (4th Cir. 2016) (internal quotation marks omitted); see 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (providing that remand orders generally are "not reviewable on appeal or otherwise"). Section 1447(d) prohibits us from reviewing remand orders based on the grounds specified in § 1447(c), including "a district court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction." Ellenburg v. Spartan Motors Chassis, Inc., 519 F.3d 192, 196 (4th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks omitted). We look to the substance of a remand order to determine whether it was issued under § 1447(c). Doe, 819 F.3d at 67.

Here, the district court remanded the case after having expressly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. We are therefore without jurisdiction to review the remand order. See id. at 66. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Green's motion to seal documents. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED