Dizadji v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company et al
Filing
19
ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr. on 03/02/10 ORDERING this action is REMANDED back to the Superior Court of California, County of Solano. Copy of remand order sent. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A.)
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 FERIDON N. DIZADJI, 13 14
v. COMPANY, SUN TRUST MORTGAGE, inclusive, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ----oo0oo----
NO. CIV. S-09-3047 FCD/DAD ORDER
15 DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST 16 INC., and DOES 1 to 100 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Defendants. ----oo0oo---This matter is before the court on the motions of defendants Deutsche Bank National Trust Company and SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. to dismiss plaintiff Feridon N. Dizadji's ("plaintiff") complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") 12(b)(6). Jurisdiction is a threshold inquiry before the adjudication of any case before the court. See Morongo Band of Mission Indians
v. Cal. State Bd. of Equalization, 858 F.2d 1376, 1380 (9th Cir. 1988). The court has reviewed defendants' notice of removal to
the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b) based on federal question
1 jurisdiction.
The court finds that the underlying complaint,
2 alleging causes of action for (1) rescission or reformation of 3 contract, (2) fraud, (3) specific performance, (4) wrongful 4 foreclosure, (5) wrongful eviction, (6) quiet title, and (7) 5 civil conspiracy, does not present a federal question and is 6 therefore improperly before this court.1 8 County of Solano. 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Plaintiff's third claim for relief seeks specific performance to modify plaintiff's home mortgage loan. This is, in essence, a contract remedy. Plaintiff does, in part, base this claim on the Hope for Homeowners' Act and the Emergency Economic Stabalization Act of 2008both federal statutes. However, "[w]hen a claim can be supported by alternative and independent theories one of which is a state law theory and one of which is a federal law theory federal question jurisdiction does not attach because federal law is not a necessary element of the claim." Rains v. Criterion Sys., Inc., 80 F.3d 339, 345 (9th Cir. 1996). Plaintiff's claim is also predicated upon California Civil Code § 2923.6, thus providing an alternative theory for relief and barring federal question jurisdiction. 2
1
Accordingly, the court
7 REMANDS this action back to the Superior Court of California,
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10 DATED: March 2, 2010
FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
