Chase Home Finance LLC v. Lucina Carranco , 158 F. App'x 201 ( 2005 )

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
November 30, 2005
No. 05-12918
THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 05-00694-CV-MHS-1
CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LUCINA CARRANCO,
and all others,
Defendant-Third Party-
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
STATE COURT OF COBB COUNTY,
Third Party-Defendant-
Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
_________________________
(November 30, 2005)
Before MARCUS, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Lucina Carranco appealed an order to remand a dispossessory action to state
court and award attorney’s fees for Carranco’s improper removal. This court
dismissed the appeal of the order of remand for lack of jurisdiction, but the appeal
of the award of attorney’s fees was permitted to go forward. Because Carranco did
not challenge the award of attorney’s fees in her brief, that argument is considered
waived. See Rowe v. Schreiber, 139 F.3d 1381, 1382 n.1 (11th Cir. 1998).
In deference to Carranco’s pro se status, even if we liberally construed
Carranco’s brief to address the underlying merits of the award of attorney’s fees,
we would affirm. The standard of review would be for abuse of discretion. Legg
v. Wyeth, __ F.3d __, No. 04-13489 (11th Cir. Oct. 25, 2005). Because Carranco
concedes that the complaint against her did not raise a federal question and
removal was not proper under Georgia v. Rachel, 384 U.S. 780, 792, 86 S. Ct.
1783, 1790 (1966), the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding
attorney’s fees.
AFFIRMED.
2