North West Properties YO v. Smith et al, No. 4:2016cv01188 - Document 4 (N.D. Ohio 2016)
Court Description: Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the district court does not have original jurisdiction over this matter. The matter is remanded to the Youngstown Municipal Court. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 5/31/2016. (JLG)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
North West Properties YO v. Smith et al Doc. 4 PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION NORTH WEST PROPERTIES YO, Plaintiff, v. SHAWN SMITH, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 4:16CV01188 JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER Pro se Defendants Shawn Smith and Julie Smith have removed this forcible entry and detainer action, based on alleged non-payment of rent, filed against them in the Youngstown Municipal Court.1 See ECF No. 1. They assert that removal is appropriate because “Defendant is a member[] of a protected class of whom the statu[t]e, the ‘Civil Rights Act of 1968' was created,” and Plaintiff North West Properties of Youngstown “intentionally fails to allege compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1968" in its Complaint. See id. ¶ 6. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1441 governs removal of civil actions from state court, and requires the federal court have original jurisdiction of the matter. Defendants’ assertion that Plaintiff did not comply with civil rights laws is not a proper basis for removal because potential counterclaims or 1 The Court notes that only Defendant Shawn Smith signed the Notice of Removal, see ECF No. 1 at PageID #: 4; however, it seems that Defendant Julie Smith joins in the removal, as her signature appears on the Answer to the Complaint, see ECF No. 3 at PageID #: 18. Dockets.Justia.com (4:16CV01188) defenses cannot form a basis for jurisdiction in federal court. Beneficial Nat’l Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1, 6 (2003) (“To determine whether the claim arises under federal law, we examine the “well pleaded” allegations of the complaint and ignore potential defenses . . . .”); Holmes Grp., Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Sys., Inc., 535 U.S. 826, 831-32 (2002) (finding that, pursuant to the well-pleaded-complaint rule, a counterclaim cannot serve as the basis for a federal court’s “arising under” jurisdiction). The district court does not have original jurisdiction over this matter. The matter is remanded to the Youngstown Municipal Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. May 31, 2016 Date /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge 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.
