Sylvia McRae v. Samuel Evans, III, No. 08-2010 (4th Cir. 2008)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2010 SYLVIA E. MCRAE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SAMUEL L. EVANS, III, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (2:08-cv-01957-CWH) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 19, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sylvia E. McRae, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sylvia E. McRae appeals the district court s order affirming the magistrate judge s order remanding her case to the South Carolina state court. case to the state Generally, [a]n order remanding a court from which reviewable on appeal or otherwise. it was removed is not 28 U.S.C.A. § 1447(d) (West 2006). Although this section could be read expansively to apply to all remand orders, the Supreme Court has held that it must be read in conjunction with 28 U.S.C.A. § 1447(c) (West 2006). Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 517 U.S. 706, 711-12 (1996). Because the remand order is based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, it falls within the scope of § 1447(c) and is therefore not reviewable. any time court before lacks final subject See 28 U.S.C.A. § 1447(c) ( If at judgment matter it appears jurisdiction, that the the case district shall be remanded. ); Ellenburg v. Spartan Motors Chassis, Inc., 519 F.3d 192, 196 (4th Cir. 2008) (holding that a remand order based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, whether sua sponte or not, falls under § 1447(c) and is not reviewable). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before contentions the court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 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.