Trustee Services of Carolina, LLC v. Jamaal Gittens

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 14, 2025·No. 24-1327·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1327

TRUSTEE SERVICES OF CAROLINA, LLC, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMAAL GITTENS, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:24-cv-00156-GCM)

Submitted: April 10, 2025 Decided: April 14, 2025

Before WILKINSON and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamaal Gittens, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jamaal Gittens seeks to appeal the district court’s order remanding this case to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. With limited exceptions not applicable here, a district court’s order remanding a removed case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d); see Doe v. Blair, 819 F.3d 64, 66-67 (4th Cir. 2016) (“[A] district court may remand a case sua sponte for lack of subject matter jurisdiction at any time, and such an order is not reviewable.” (citations omitted)). Accordingly, we deny Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s motion to intervene, and we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Doe, 819 F.3d at 66. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Trustee Services of Carolina, LLC v. Jamaal Gittens, (4th Cir. 2025).

Trustee Services of Carolina, LLC v. Jamaal Gittens (Trustee Services of Carolina, LLC v. Jamaal Gittens) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Doe Ex Rel. Houdersheldt v. Blair
819 F.3d 64 (Fourth Circuit, 2016)