Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_15-cv-00699/USCOURTS-ared-4_15-cv-00699-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 210
Nature of Suit: Land Condemnation
Cause of Action: 28:1443(1) Rent, Lease &amp; Ejectment

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

WESTERN DIVISION 

CENTER GROVE WATER 

USERS ASSOCIATION, INC. 

v. No. 4:15-cv-699-DPM 

PLAINTIFF 

MOSES WATTS, SR., and 

RUBY WATTS DEFENDANTS 

ORDER 

This is the second eminent domain case the Wattses have removed from 

state court this year. See Entergy Arkansas, Inc. v. Moses Watts and Ruby Watts, 

No. 4:15-cv-557-BRW (E.D. Ark. 24 September 2015). The Wattses say the 

state-court proceedings have violated their federal rights. Ng 1 at 3-4. This 

Court must make sure it has subject matter jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); 

Arbaugh v. Y & H Corporation, 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006). 

It does not. The Wattses saw civil rights violations in the state case at 

least by late June 2015, when they had received and moved to set aside the 

state court's order of possession. Ng 1at10. McCullough v. Ligon, 430 F. Supp. 

2d 846, 849 (E.D. Ark. 2006), aff don other grounds, 271 Fed. Appx. 547. So they 

had to remove the case by late July. 28U.S.C.§1446(b). They didn't. NQ 1. The 

removal is therefore untimely. 

Case 4:15-cv-00699-DPM Document 2 Filed 11/18/15 Page 1 of 2
Nor have the Wattses alleged enough to remove under 28U.S.C.§1443. 

It's not enough for the Wattses to say their rights have been violated in state 

court; the state proceedings must run their course unless they're nearly 

guaranteed to fail. Doe v. Berry, 967 F.2d 1255, 1257-58 (8th Cir. 1992); 

McCullough, 430 F. Supp. 2d at 850. 

* * * 

The Court remands this case to the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, 

Arkansas. 

So Ordered. 

D.P. Marshall Jr~ 

United States District Judge 

-2-

Case 4:15-cv-00699-DPM Document 2 Filed 11/18/15 Page 2 of 2