Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Thomas

United States District Court, District of South Carolina, Columbia Division

February 3, 2015

Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for Soundview Home Loan Trust 2006-1 Asset-Backed Certificates, Plaintiff,
v.
Helen Valencia Thomas, Corporate Person, Washington-Thomas, Helen Valencia, all natural person; Darrel Antonio Thomas, Corporate Person, Thomas, Darrel Antonio, all Natural Person, Defendants.

OPINION AND ORDER

CAMERON McGOWAN CURRIE, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This matter is before the court on Defendants’ pro se Notice of Removal filed in this court on January 5, 2015.

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(e), DSC, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation (“Report”). On January 16, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the matter be remanded to the Richland County Court of Common Pleas as this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. The Magistrate Judge advised the Defendants of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if they failed to do so. Defendants filed objections to the Report on January 28, 2015.

The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

The court has conducted a de novo review of the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and Defendants’ objections. The court agrees with the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference in this Order.

Defendants’ objections seek to establish subject matter jurisdiction by providing a ground for removal other than that provided in the original Notice of Removal. However, “[c]ourts have no discretion to permit amendments furnishing new allegations of a jurisdictional basis.” Wood v. Crane Co., 764 F.3d 316, 323 (4th Cir. 2014). Accordingly, this matter is remanded to the Richland County Court of Common Pleas. The Clerk shall ensure that a copy of this Opinion and Order is served on counsel for Plaintiff.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.