McRae v. Evans ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-2010
SYLVIA E. MCRAE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SAMUEL L. EVANS, III,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District
Judge. (2:08-cv-01957-CWH)
Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 19, 2008
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Sylvia E. McRae, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Sylvia E. McRae appeals the district court’s order
affirming the magistrate judge’s order remanding her case to the
South Carolina state court. Generally, “[a]n order remanding a
case to the state court from which it was removed is not
reviewable on appeal or otherwise.” 28 U.S.C.A. § 1447(d) (West
2006). Although this section could be read expansively to apply
to all remand orders, the Supreme Court has held that it must be
read in conjunction with 28 U.S.C.A. § 1447(c) (West 2006).
Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 517 U.S. 706, 711-12 (1996).
Because the remand order is based on a lack of subject
matter jurisdiction, it falls within the scope of § 1447(c) and
is therefore not reviewable. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 1447(c) (“If at
any time before final judgment it appears that the district
court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be
remanded.”); Ellenburg v. Spartan Motors Chassis, Inc., 519 F.3d
192, 196 (4th Cir. 2008) (holding that a remand order based on
lack of subject matter jurisdiction, whether sua sponte or not,
falls under § 1447(c) and is not reviewable).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2