Stephen Christopher Wright v. Sarah Elizabeth Holmes, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma grants Plaintiff Stephen Christopher Wright’s motion to remand an action removed from Oklahoma state court. The court holds that the operative pleading asserts only state-law claims and does not present a federal question on its face, despite the removing defendant’s contention that the allegations could support a Fourth Amendment or 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. The case is remanded to the District Court of Garvin County, Oklahoma.

Holdings

1. A motion to remand based on lack of subject-matter jurisdiction may be considered at any time before final judgment, notwithstanding the thirty-day deadline applicable to other removal defects.
2. A federal court lacks federal-question jurisdiction when the face of the plaintiff's properly pleaded complaint asserts only state-law claims, even if the factual allegations could potentially support an unpleaded federal claim.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's motion to remand was timely when it was filed one day beyond the thirty-day period for challenging nonjurisdictional removal defects.
2. Whether the federal court had federal-question jurisdiction when the face of the operative state-court petition asserted only state-law claims, notwithstanding the removing defendant's contention that the allegations could support an implied Fourth Amendment or 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim.

Disposition

remanded