Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-03358/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-03358-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON,

Plaintiff,

v.

PETRA MARTINEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-03358-VC 

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Re: Dkt. No. 12

This unlawful detainer action is remanded to the Monterey County Superior Court for 

lack of subject matter jurisdiction. While the value of the property may exceed $75,000, the 

amount in controversy in an unlawful detainer case is determined by “the amount of damages 

sought in the complaint, not the value of the subject real property.” Bank of New York Mellon v. 

Clarke, No. 15-cv-02400-MEJ, 2015 WL 4380612, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 2, 2015). Because the 

Bank is requesting $60 per day in damages from the expiration of the Notice to Quit on May 14, 

2018, their damages fall well below the $75,000 threshold. Nor can the defendants assert federal 

question jurisdiction on the basis of a constitutional defense they might raise. See Caterpillar 

Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 392 (1987) (“[F]ederal jurisdiction exists only when a federal 

question is presented on the face of the plaintiff’s properly pleaded complaint.”). Accordingly, 

this case is not properly in federal court.

The defendants’ decision to remove this case is likely sanctionable, and there is a serious 

concern that they are merely attempting to delay the unlawful detainer proceedings. However, 

because the defendants are representing themselves, they will get one final warning. Any 

similarly meritless removal will result in monetary sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 or the 

Court’s inherent authority.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 5, 2019

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge

Case 3:19-cv-03358-VC Document 17 Filed 07/05/19 Page 1 of 1