Retreat LLC v. Moorer, No. 1:2018cv01028 - Document 6 (N.D. Ga. 2018)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER OVERRULING the Defendant's 5 Objections and ADOPTING the Magistrate Judge's 3 Final Report and Recommendation. This case is hereby REMANDED to the Magistrate Court of DeKalb County. The Clerk is DIRECTED to close the case. Signed by Judge Amy Totenberg on 4/26/2018. (sap)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Retreat LLC v. Moorer Doc. 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION RETREAT LLC, d/ b/ a REGAL VISTA, : : : Plaintiff, : : v. : : OLIVIA MOORER, and All Others, : : : Defendants. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-CV-10 28-AT ORD ER This m atter is before the Court on the Magistrate J udge’s Report and Recom m endation (“R&R”) [Doc. 3] recom m ending that this dispossessory action be rem anded to the Magistrate Court of DeKalb Coun ty. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court reviews the Magistrate J udge’s R&R for clear error if no objections are filed to the report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party files objection s, however, the district court m ust determ ine de novo any part of the Magistrate J udge’s disposition that is the subject of a proper objection. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Plaintiff filed this dispossessory action against Defendant Moorer in the State Court of DeKalb County. Defendant Moorer asserted in her rem oval papers that this Court has federal question jurisdiction over this m atter because Plaintiff’s dispossessory action violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Dockets.Justia.com The Magistrate J udge concluded that federal subject m atter jurisdiction was lacking because (1) jurisdiction cannot be based on the assertion of a federal defense or coun terclaim , and (2) there were no facts alleged in Plaintiff’s com plaint that would support the existence of diversity jurisdiction. Defen dan t filed tim ely objections to the R&R, asserting that the R&R is unconstitution al under the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteen th Am en dm en ts 1, the Seventh Am endm en t’s right to trial by jury, and the Bill of Rights with respect to a trial before “Tribun al Court.” The Court has reviewed and considered Defendant Moorer’s Objections to the R&R on a de novo basis and finds they lack m erit. Accordingly, the Court hereby OVERRU LES Defendant Moorer’s Objections and AD OPTS the Magistrate J udge’s Report and Recom m endation as the opinion of this Court. For the reasons stated in the Magistrate J udge’s Report and Recom m endation, the Court lacks federal subject m atter jurisdiction over this m atter an d the Court REMAN D S this case to the Magistrate Court of DeKalb County. 2 There being no further issues before the Court, the Clerk is D IRECTED to close the case. 1 Although Plaintiff actually asserts a violation of the Fifteenth Am endm ent, it is apparent that Plaintiff intended to object pursuant to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Am endm ent. 2 As this case involves a pro se Defendant, the Court provides further guidance. An order rem anding the case m eans that the case will continue to be heard, but in the court where it was originally filed – here, the Magistrate Court of DeKalb County. The case is simply being returned to the Magistrate Court for further proceedings. Any future m otions should be filed with that court. 2 IT IS SO ORD ERED this 26th day of April, 20 18. ___________________________________ AMY TOTENBERG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3
]]>
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.
