US Bank National Association v. Tracie Green

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: October 2, 2023
• Docket: 23-1176
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1176 Doc: 17 Filed: 10/02/2023 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1176

US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TRACIE L. GREEN, a/k/a Tracie Ledora Mitchem-Green,

Defendant - Appellant,

and

CARDINAL PINES HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION, INC.; PALMETTO CITIZENS FEDERAL CREDIT UNION,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Sherri A. Lydon, District Judge. (3:22-cv-04215-SAL)

Submitted: September 28, 2023 Decided: October 2, 2023

Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1176 Doc: 17 Filed: 10/02/2023 Pg: 2 of 3

Tracie L. Green, Appellant Pro Se. John S. Kay, HUTCHENS LAW FIRM, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-1176 Doc: 17 Filed: 10/02/2023 Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:

Tracie L. Green seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate

judge’s recommendation and remanding Appellee’s action against her to the state court

from which it was removed. The district court remanded the case after determining that it

lacked subject matter jurisdiction. “Congress has placed broad restrictions on the power

of federal appellate courts to review district court orders remanding removed cases to state

court.” Doe v. Blair, 819 F.3d 64, 66 (4th Cir. 2016) (internal quotation marks omitted);

see 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (providing that remand orders generally are “not reviewable on

appeal or otherwise”). Section 1447(d) prohibits us from reviewing remand orders based

on the grounds specified in § 1447(c), including “a district court’s lack of subject matter

jurisdiction.” Ellenburg v. Spartan Motors Chassis, Inc., 519 F.3d 192, 196 (4th Cir. 2008)

(internal quotation marks omitted). We look to the substance of a remand order to

determine whether it was issued under § 1447(c). Doe, 819 F.3d at 67.

Here, the district court remanded the case after having expressly determined that it

lacked subject matter jurisdiction. We are therefore without jurisdiction to review the

remand order. See id. at 66. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

We deny Green’s motion to seal documents. 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