Cheatham v. United States
- Maxine Chesney
- 3:22-cv-04354
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Cheatham v. United States, Judge Chesney granted the United States’ motion to dismiss because derivative jurisdiction barred the removed claim.
M’Charlotte Cheatham’s claim against the United States was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction after removal from state court.
What happened
In Cheatham v. United States, M’Charlotte Cheatham sought more than $10,000 from the United States after alleging that the Federal Bureau of Investigation failed to act on a complaint about her brother. She filed the case in state court and represented herself.
The United States removed the case to federal court and asked for dismissal. The court explained that the Federal Tort Claims Act gives federal district courts exclusive jurisdiction over certain claims for money damages against the United States. Because the state court lacked jurisdiction over Cheatham’s claim, the federal court acquired none when the case was removed.
Judge Maxine M. Chesney granted the United States’ motion to dismiss, vacated the scheduled hearing, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the file. The court did not address the United States’ additional arguments.
The detailed version
- Cheatham v. United States · No. 3:22-cv-04354
- Maxine Chesney
- Sept. 9, 2022
Background
M’Charlotte Cheatham filed the action in state court and sought monetary relief of more than $10,000 from the United States. She alleged that she was injured because the Federal Bureau of Investigation did not take action on a complaint she made about her brother. The opinion states that Cheatham proceeded without a lawyer.
The United States removed the case to federal district court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442, which permits removal of certain state-court actions against the United States or its agencies. The United States then moved to dismiss.
Court’s reasoning
The United States relied on the derivative jurisdiction doctrine. Under that doctrine, when a case is removed from state court, the federal court receives no jurisdiction that the state court did not have.
The court determined that Cheatham’s claim fell within the Federal Tort Claims Act’s provision giving federal district courts exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions seeking money damages for injury caused by a government employee’s negligent or wrongful act or omission within the scope of employment. Because the state court lacked jurisdiction over the claim, the federal court also lacked jurisdiction after removal.
Disposition
The court granted the United States’ motion to dismiss. It vacated the scheduled hearing and directed the Clerk of Court to close the file. The court stated that it did not address the United States’ additional arguments. Judge Maxine M. Chesney signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.