Lajaunie v. Samuels & Son Seafood Co., Inc.

614 F. App'x 33 (2d Cir. 2015) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · August 25, 2015 · No. 15-78-cv

Summary

The Second Circuit vacated the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and remanded with instructions to remand the case to New York state court. The court held that, when a removed case falls outside federal subject-matter jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) requires remand rather than dismissal.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Writing for the Court
Per curiam; Guido Calabresi; Reena Raggi; Richard C. Wesley
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
August 25, 2015
Docket number
15-78-cv
Procedural posture
Plaintiffs appealed from the Southern District of New York's dismissal of their removed state-court action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. On appeal, plaintiffs abandoned their challenge to the district court's Rooker-Feldman jurisdictional conclusion and argued that the federal court should have remanded the case to New York state court rather than dismissing it.
Standard of review
The court reviewed the jurisdictional disposition and application of the federal removal-remand statute; because the issue concerned subject-matter jurisdiction, the court treated the jurisdictional defect as requiring remand rather than dismissal.
Precedential value
Nonprecedential summary order; the order states that rulings by summary order do not have precedential effect.
Parties
Philippe Lajaunie, 15 John Corporation v. Samuels and Son Seafood Co., Inc., Saldutti, LLC, Robert L. Saldutti
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

subject matter jurisdictionappellate procedurecivil procedurefederalism

Practice areas

Civil procedureFederal jurisdictionAppellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. When a removed case is found to be outside the federal court's subject-matter jurisdiction, should the federal court remand the action to state court rather than dismiss it?
  2. Whether the district court correctly concluded that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred federal jurisdiction was not decided because plaintiffs abandoned that issue on appeal.

Holdings

  1. When a case has been removed from state court and the federal district court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the proper disposition under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) is remand to the state court rather than dismissal.

Key quotations

“The Rooker-Feldman doctrine pertains not to the validity of the suit but to the federal court’s subject matter jurisdiction to hear it. When a case has been removed from state court to federal court, ‘if at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded.’” (at 2)

Factual background

Plaintiffs alleged that defendants had committed fraud in procuring a Pennsylvania state-court judgment, thereby injuring plaintiffs' credit ratings. Plaintiffs originally brought the action in New York state court, and defendants removed it to federal court.

Procedural history

Plaintiffs filed suit in New York state court alleging fraud in procuring a Pennsylvania state-court judgment that injured their credit ratings. Defendants removed the action to federal court and moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The district court dismissed the case, and the Second Circuit vacated the dismissal and remanded with instructions for the district court to remand the case to New York state court.

Remand instructions

The judgment entered on December 15, 2014, was vacated, and the case was remanded to the Southern District of New York with instructions to remand the action to New York state court.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Second Circuit