Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02400/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02400-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jerry Merkelo
Plaintiff
Hanna Merkelo-Cheberenchyk
Plaintiff
Georgina Spidell
Defendant

Document Text:

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JERRY MERKELO, HANNA 

MERKELO-CHEBERENCHYK, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

GEORGINA SPIDELL, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:14-cv-2400-KJM-EFB PS 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 This action, in which the parties are pro se, proceeds before this court pursuant to Eastern 

District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On October 14, 2014, 

defendant Georgina Spidell, proceeding pro se, filed a second and duplicative notice of removal, 

which purports to remove plaintiffs’ unlawful detainer action, filed as Sacramento County 

Superior Court case number 14UD04126. ECF No. 1 at 6.1

 As discussed below, the assigned 

district judge remanded the unlawful detainer action to the state court on October 28, 2014 and 

Spidell’s removal petition filed on October 14 is duplicative. 

 1

 The notice of removal includes a copy of defendant’s answer filed in the state court, but 

does not include a copy of the complaint. However, the notice identifies the same superior court 

case number as the complaint removed in 2:14-cv-2010-KJM-EFB PS. 

Also on October 14, 2014, defendant filed applications to proceed in forma pauperis

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. ECF No. 2. However, in light of the recommendation herein that 

this action be remanded, defendant’s requests to proceed in forma pauperis is moot. 

Case 2:14-cv-02400-KJM-EFB Document 3 Filed 11/21/14 Page 1 of 3
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2

 Plaintiffs filed the unlawful detainer action in state court on June 9, 2014, against 

Georgina and Rodney Spidell. Defendant Rodney Spidell2 filed a notice of removal on August 

29, 2014, which resulted in a civil action being opened in this court as Merkelo v. Spidell, No. 

2:14-cv-2010-KJM-EFB (Merkelo I), ECF No. 1 (removing Sacramento County Superior Court 

case number 14UD04126). Judge Mueller ordered the action remanded to the state court on 

October 28, 2014. Id. at ECF No. 9. During the interim, while the first removal was still pending 

before this court, Georgina Spidell filed the second and duplicative notice of removal on October 

14, 2014, purporting to remove the same Superior Court case number 14UD04126. She did not, 

however, file the required notice of related cases, see Local Rule 123, or otherwise file any notice 

informing the court that Rodney Spidell had previously sought to remove the same action. Thus, 

the clerk opened a second and duplicative civil case in this court. 

 It is clear that the notice of removal filed by Georgina Spidell seeks to remove the 

identical unlawful detainer action that had purportedly already been removed to this court and has 

since been remanded in Merkelo I. See Merkelo v. Spidell, No. 2:14-cv-2400-KJM-EFB (Merkelo 

II) (again purporting to remove Sacramento County Superior Court case number 14UD04126). 

Apart from Georgina Spidell finally joining in the removal attempted by Rodney Spidell, her 

removal petition is completely duplicative of Merkelo I and must be remanded for the same 

reasons as Merkelo I. See Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1105 n.2 (9th Cir. 1995) (holding 

that a complaint that “merely repeats pending or previously litigated claims” may be dismissed as 

frivolous under the authority of then-numbered 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)); see also Adams v. Cal. 

Dep’t of Health Servs., 487 F.3d 684, 688 (9th Cir. 2007) (“Plaintiffs generally have no right to 

maintain two separate actions involving the same subject matter at the same time in the same 

court and against the same defendant.” ) (citation and quotation marks omitted), cert. denied, 552 

U.S. 1076 (2007); accord Kahre v. Damm, 342 F. App’x 267, 268-69 (9th Cir. 2009) (affirming 

///// 

 2

 The complaint named both Rodney and Georgina Spidell, Merkelo I, ECF No. 1, p. 25 

of 37 at ¶ 1. However, only Rodney Spidell signed the first notice of removal and only he was 

listed in the caption of his notice and removal petition. 

Case 2:14-cv-02400-KJM-EFB Document 3 Filed 11/21/14 Page 2 of 3
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

3

dismissal of later-filed case where that case contained claims that were almost entirely duplicative 

of claims asserted in an earlier-filed case). 

 For the reasons stated above and in this court’s earlier Findings and Recommendation and 

in Judge Mueller’s remand order filed in Merkelo I, ECF Nos. 3 and 9, this matter must be 

remanded to the state court. 

 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that Merkelo II be remanded to the Superior 

Court of the State of California in and for the County of Sacramento and that the Clerk of Court 

be directed to close this case. 

 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections 

shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. Failure to file 

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 

Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th 

Cir. 1991). 

DATED: November 20, 2014. 

Case 2:14-cv-02400-KJM-EFB Document 3 Filed 11/21/14 Page 3 of 3