Summary
The United States District Court for the District of New Mexico grants Plaintiff Daniel E. Lujan’s motion to remand a state-law action concerning injuries sustained while detained at a privately operated county correctional facility. The Court holds that Defendants failed to establish that CoreCivic was acting under the direction of a federal officer as required for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). The Court remands the case to the Thirteenth Judicial District Court for Cibola County and denies a related motion to consolidate as moot.
Holdings
- The defendants failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that CoreCivic was acting under the United States Marshals Service as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1), because the contractual requirements and federal oversight shown in the record did not establish the requisite level of supervision, control, or delegated authority.
- The motion to consolidate was denied as moot after the court granted remand.
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendants established that CoreCivic was acting under the direction of a federal officer or agency as required for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1).
- Whether the defendants' motion to consolidate should remain pending after the action was remanded.
Disposition
remanded
Cases Cited (6)
- Dutcher v. Matheson, 733 F.3d 980, 985 (10th Cir. 2013)(followed)
- Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs of Boulder Cnty. v. Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc., 25 F.4th 1238, 1251-54 (10th Cir. 2022)(followed)
- Watson v. Philip Morris Cos., Inc., 551 U.S. 142 (2007)(followed)
- Winters v. Diamond Shamrock Chem. Co., 149 F.3d 387 (5th Cir. 1998)(followed)
- Latiolais v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc., 951 F.3d 286 (5th Cir. 2020)(noted)
- Lind v. Ne. Ohio Corr. Ctr., No. 4:21-cv-2165, 2022 WL 429453 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 27, 2022)(distinguished)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…