Hi there;Acting as a pro se, I had a state case that was removed to federal, and since it almost identical to a federal case I had also filed the two were consolidated by the judge. However the removed case had a remand decision pending that had not yet been ruled on. My question is this: I want to object to the consolidation as I am within 14 days of the order, but I do not want to offend the Court (which has been exceedingly generous with me so far) by telling her that part of the case does not belong in her court and that I preferred it be decided in the State Court due to important compelling state interests in the enforcement of its own version of the federal law involved.How can I best do this? Can I motion an objection to the consolidation in a nice way? or should I perhaps motion for partial remand? Please let me know what legal authority I can point to, if only one statute or case, I can find the rest. Thank you
Hi, I’m a moderator for this topic and I wonder whether you’re still waiting for an answer. If you are, please let me know and I will do my best to find a professional to assist you right away. If not, feel free to let me know and I will cancel this question for you. Thank you!
Still no answer.
Sometimes, finding the right Expert can take a little longer than expected and we thank you greatly for your understanding. We’ll be in touch again shortly.
well I've given up at this point
Thank you for your question today, I look forward to assisting you. I bring nearly 20 years of legal experience in various disciplines.Unfortunately, there really is not nice way to object to the court having jurisdiction over the claim. If there are federal statutes involved, the case is properly removed to federal court and that court has jurisdiction to hear cases involving federal claims.What you would essentially be having to say is that you do not feel that the federal court judge, that resides in and comes from the very state that you are located in, is not capable of understanding the underlying state issues.It is going to be an insult, no matter how you go about it. These are federal judges. They have been selected from their state, because they were of the highest caliber when it came to understanding their state's laws. So, there simply is no nice way to tell that you judge that you think they shouldn't hear a state claim. Furthermore, it is an objection that will almost certainly be denied (given the overlapping federal issue) and then you'll have upset the judge that will be hearing your claim, which is most unwise.If I was the attorney in this case (and it was not pro se), I'd accept the courts jurisdiction. I believe that this is the reason that people have been reluctant to answer your question. No one likes giving out bad news or being rated down for having to do so. I just didn't want your question to go on ignored.Jagcorps_esq41094.2097731134