Cooper v. City of Plano Texas, 260 F. App'x 680 (5th Cir. 2007). · Go Syfert
Search
Cooper v. City of Plano Texas, 260 F. App'x 680 (5th Cir. 2007). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
5 citation events (5 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Meley v. Mesa Airlines Inc. (txwd, 2021-08-16)
Statutes interpreted (leading-cases list)
#4 42 U.S.C. § 1443 cited 1× in this case · 11 total citations of statute
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Meley v. Mesa Airlines Inc.
W.D. Tex. · 2021 · confidence medium
As the Supreme Court reasoned in Shamrock Oil, “the plaintiff, having submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the state court, was not entitled to avail himself of a right of removal conferred only on a defendant who has not submitted himself to the jurisdiction.” 313 U.S. at 106 . 3 Accord Renegade Swish, L.L.C. v. Wright, 857 F.3d 692, 698 (5th Cir. 2017) (holding that employer had no right to remove case to federal court because it was original plaintiff); Cooper v. City of Plano, Tex., 260 F. App’x 680, at *1 (5th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (“A plaintiff may not remove an action from…
discussed Cited "see" Ireland v. Simmons
W.D. Tex. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. City of Plano, 260 F. App’x 680, 680 (5th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (affirming the district court’s remand order because a plaintiff may not remove an action from state court to federal district court).
cited Cited "see" Biegon v. City of Dallas
5th Cir. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. City of Plano Texas, 260 F. App’x 680 (5th Cir. 2007); Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets, 313 U.S. 100, 108 (1941).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jay Sandon COOPER, Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
CITY OF PLANO, TEXAS; Thomas H. Muehlenbeck, City Manager; City of Plano Planning and Zoning Commission; City of Plano City Council; Cynthia O’Banner; Roxanne Luna; MacKlin Wright; City of Plano Property Standards Department, Defendants-Appellees
06-11408.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Dec 21, 2007.
260 F. App'x 680
Jay Sandon Cooper, pro se.
Garwood, Garza, Owen, Per Curiam.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Unpublished
PER CURIAM: *

Jan Sandon Cooper appeals the district court’s remand order. The district court remanded because neither 28 U.S.C. § 1441 nor 42 U.S.C. § 1443 authorizes removal of a case to federal court by a plaintiff. A plaintiff may not remove an action from state court to federal district court. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a); see also McKenzie v. United States, 678 F.2d 571, 574 (5th Cir.1982) (citing § 1441(a); Chicago, Rock Island & Peoria Railroad Co. v. Stude, 346 U.S. 574, 580, 74 S.Ct. 290, 98 L.Ed. 317 (1954); and Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets, 313 U.S. 100, 108, 61 S.Ct. 868, 85 L.Ed. 1214 (1941)). [1]

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.

1

. See also Wright, Miller & Cooper, 14C, Federal Practice and Procedure: Jurisdiction 3d § 3731 at 251 ("The question of which parties may exercise the statutory right of removal has been answered by Congress. Section 1446(a) of Title 28 authorizes removal only by the state court defendants ... ”).