- 1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Lisa A. Bryant, Case No. 2:20-cv-00594-CDS-EJY 5 Plaintiff Order Striking Plaintiff’s Statement Regarding Removal and Denying 6 v. Motion to Remand 7 Madison Management Services, LLC, et al., [ECF Nos. 83, 86] 8 Defendants 9 10 Pending before the court is defendants Madison Management Services, LLC, Porras, 11 PLLC, and Waldman and Porras, PLLC’s motion to remand. ECF No. 86. Therein, defendants 12 move this court to keep Eighth Judicial District Court case number A-24-885943-C in state 13 court, or in the alternative, remand that action. See id. That motion is premised on plaintiff Lisa 14 Bryant’s statement of removal (ECF No. 83) that was filed on April 28, 2024. For the reasons set 15 forth herein, I find Bryant’s statement of removal improper, so I deny defendants’ motion for 16 remand as moot. 17 I. Discussion 18 Bryant brought this action against defendants in 2020, alleging violations of the Fair 19 Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and slander of title. See First Am. Compl., ECF No. 30. 20 Almost four years later, after the close of discovery, and past the dispositive motions’ deadline, 21 Bryant filed a statement of removal regarding a separate, new action brought against her in the 22 Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County, Nevada, seemingly attempting to remove that 23 action into this case. See ECF No. 83. 24 25 26 1 The right to remove a case to federal court is entirely a statutory creation. See Libhart v. 2 Santa Monica Dairy Co., 592 F.2d 1062, 1064 (9th Cir. 1979). The removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441, 3 allows defendants to remove a state court case that could have been filed originally in federal court 4 under either federal question or diversity jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(a), (b) (emphasis 5 added); see also 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332(a). Only state court actions that could originally have been 6 filed in federal court may be removed. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a); see Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 7 386, 392 (1987). 8 Here, Bryant—the plaintiff—filed a statement of removal, seeking to remove a case 9 where she is the defendant, to bring it into this action. But a plaintiff “cannot remove an action 10 to federal court.” Progressive W. Ins. Co. v. Preciado, 479 F.3d 1014, 1017 (9th Cir. 2007); see also 11 Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets, 313 U.S. 100 (1941) (holding that only defendants, not a plaintiff 12 against whom a counterclaim is asserted, has the right of removal) (emphasis added). Insofar as 13 Bryant is removing case number A-24-885943-C in her capacity as defendant in that suit, she 14 must do so into a separate action. “A case cannot be removed from state court to become part of an 15 already existing federal case.” Iqbal v. Afzal, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35912, at *5–6 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 16 15, 2010) (quoting Gilliam v. Austin, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9555, at *11 (N.D. Cal. May 13, 17 2002)). Indeed, “[i]n a proper removal, ‘the notice of removal is the means of removing a case 18 from state court to federal district court, where it is viewed as a ‘new’ case and is assigned a 19 ‘new’ case number.” Paralee Boyd Salon, LLC v. COG Studio, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131832, (E.D. 20 Mich. Sept. 27, 2016), appeal dismissed by 2017 WL 4863251 (6th Cir. Feb. 15, 2017). 21 Consequently, Bryant’s attempt to remove case number A-24-885943-C into this action 22 is improper and is hereby stricken. If Bryant, as the defendant, seeks to remove the case pending 23 in Clark County, she must do so into a separate civil action and comply with 28 U.S.C. § 1441. 24 Because the statement of removal is now stricken, defendants’ motion for remand is mooted and 25 is denied accordingly. 26 1 IL. Conclusion 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Bryant’s statement of removal [ECF No. 83] is 3} STRICKEN. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants’ motion to remand [ECF No. 86] is DENIED as moot. /, ) 6 Dated: June 10, 2024 LZ at, ). Silva 3 Unité VStates District Judge 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Document Info
Docket Number: 2:20-cv-00594
Filed Date: 6/10/2024
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/2/2024