City of Urbandale v. Roberta Whitson

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 97-1556

___________

City of Urbandale, Iowa, *

*

Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa.

Roberta Whitson, * * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: June 27, 1997 Filed: July 17, 1997

___________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

After the City of Urbandale petitioned an Iowa state court to enjoin Roberta Whitson from continuing to construct a building in violation of certain City ordinances, Whitson sought to remove the action to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1443. Upon the City’s motion, the district court1 remanded the action to state court and denied Whitson's motion for reconsideration. This appeal followed.

We have jurisdiction to review an order remanding a case that was removed pursuant to § 1443. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d); Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co., 116

1 The HONORABLE RONALD E. LONGSTAFF, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

S. Ct. 1712, 1718-20 (1996). Turning to the merits, we conclude Whitson failed to show any grounds to support removal under § 1443, see Georgia v. Rachel, 384 U.S. 780, 788, 803 (1966); Thornton v. Holloway, 70 F.3d 522, 523 (8th Cir. 1995), and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Whitson's motion to reconsider, see Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 862 F.2d 161, 169 (8th Cir. 1988).

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.