Court Opinion

ID: 9397907
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-26 21:01:51.981139+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:28.673067
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1780      Doc: 18        Filed: 05/25/2023   Pg: 1 of 4

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                              UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                  FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1780

        JOELLE ANGEL; ROZELYND BRIGHT; CHERIE LEE; CYNTHIA PARKER;
        KELVIN PENNY; PEGGY PENNY; SAMUEL WARD; MICHAEL WILLIAMS;
        SANDRA WILLIAMS,

                            Plaintiffs - Appellants,

                     and

        KRISTINA VINSON,

                            Appellant,

                     and

        KEITH L. CURRY; STEPHEN VINSON,

                            Plaintiffs,

                     v.

        CHARLESTOWNE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.; CAVALIER
        COMMUNITY PARTNERS, LLC; ATLANTIC COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT,
        CORPORATION; TRENTE BALDERSON; JEFFREY HODGSON; PHILIP
        MASSA,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, Senior District Judge. (2:21-cv-00453-RAJ-RJK)

        Submitted: May 23, 2023                                        Decided: May 25, 2023
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1780      Doc: 18         Filed: 05/25/2023    Pg: 2 of 4

        Before AGEE, WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Joelle Angel, Rozelynd Bright, Cherie Lee, Cynthia Parker, Kelvin Penny, Peggy Penny,
        Samuel Ward, Michael Williams, Sandra Williams, Keith L. Curry, Stephen Vinson,
        Kristina Vinson, Appellants Pro Se. Eve Grandis Campbell, O’HAGAN MEYER PLLC,
        Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1780         Doc: 18       Filed: 05/25/2023    Pg: 3 of 4

        PER CURIAM:

               Appellants appeal the district court’s orders granting Charlestowne Condominium

        Association, Inc.’s (“CCA’s”) motion to remand this removed action to state court for lack

        of federal subject matter jurisdiction and denying Appellants’ motions for sanctions against

        CCA’s counsel and their motion to amend the motion for sanctions. CCA has moved to

        dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

               Generally, “[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was

        removed is not reviewable on appeal,” but there is an exception for “an order remanding a

        case to the State court from which it was removed pursuant to” 28 U.S.C. § 1443. 28

        U.S.C. § 1447(d); see BP P.L.C. v. Mayor & City Council of Balt., 141 S. Ct. 1532, 1536-

        37 (2021). Liberally construing Appellants’ pro se notice of removal, see Wall v. Rasnick,

        42 F.4th 214, 218 (4th Cir. 2022), Appellants premised removal on § 1443 based on their

        counterclaim under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619. We therefore conclude

        that we have jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Accordingly, we deny CCA’s motion to

        dismiss the appeal.

               Turning to Appellants’ challenges to the orders remanding the action to state court

        for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction and denying Appellants’ motions for

        sanctions and to amend the motion for sanctions, we have reviewed the record and find no

        reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Angel v. Charlestowne

        Condo. Ass’n, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-00453-RAJ-RJK (E.D. Va. Jan. 25, 2022; June 30, 2022).

        We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

                                                       3
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1780     Doc: 18        Filed: 05/25/2023   Pg: 4 of 4

        presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

        process.

                                                                                  AFFIRMED

                                                  4