Felicia Taylor v. Mortgage Electronic etc., No. 13-3114 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil Case - Removal. District court did not err in denying motion to remand removed case to state court, as jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy was proper. Dismissal was also proper for failure to state a claim and district court did not abuse its discretion in denying post-judgment relief.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-3114 ___________________________ Felicia Dionne Taylor, Ph. D. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.; Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., Individually and its Successor Bank of America NA; Bank of America N.A.; US Bank National Association, Individually and as Trustee for JP Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2006-CW2 by Bank of America NA (BANA), Attorney in Fact; JP Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2006-CW2; BAC Home Loans Servicing LP; Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P. lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: June 19, 2014 Filed: June 30, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. In this civil action removed from state court, Felicia Taylor appeals the district court s1 orders refusing to remand the matter to state court, dismissing her complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and denying post-judgment relief. Upon careful review, see Junk v. Terminix Int l Co., 628 F.3d 439, 444 (8th Cir. 2010), we conclude that the court properly denied Taylor s motion to remand, because removal, based on diversity of citizenship and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000, was proper. We also conclude that the court properly dismissed the action for failure to state a claim, see Hallquist v. United Home Loans, Inc., 715 F.3d 1040, 1044 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review), for the reasons discussed by the district court; and we see no abuse of discretion in the denial of post-judgment relief, see Bernard v. U.S. Dep t of Interior, 674 F.3d 904, 908 (8th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
