Eldee-K Rental Properties, LLC v. Directv, Inc.
748 F.3d 943
9th Cir.2014Background
- Eldee-K Rental Properties, LLC (Connecticut LLC) owns an apartment building in Hartford, CT and sued DIRECTV in federal court in California alleging DIRECTV installs satellite equipment in common areas without landlord consent.
- Complaint alleged DIRECTV uses a two-part installation form; Part 2 permits tenant certification of landlord consent (or that consent is not required). Eldee-K alleged DIRECTV installed equipment and drilled holes in the building exterior without consent.
- Eldee-K sought class certification of landlords nationwide and pleaded a UCL (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200) claim seeking injunctive relief plus two negligence claims (seeking declaratory/injunctive relief and damages).
- DIRECTV moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under the local action doctrine, arguing the claims are local to Connecticut (where the property sits).
- The district court dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1), concluding the gravamen of Eldee-K’s suit was trespass on Connecticut real property and thus local; Eldee-K appealed.
- The Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding that under California law the complaint’s substance is a trespass/local action and federal court in California lacked jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Eldee-K’s UCL claim is local (requires suit where property is located) or transitory | UCL claim challenges a nationwide unfair policy of accepting sham consents; harm to property is incidental — claim is transitory | Gravamen is unauthorized entry/trespass on real property in CT; injury is to property so claim is local | Held local: UCL claim’s substance is trespass to real property, thus local under California law |
| Whether the local action doctrine deprives the federal court of subject-matter jurisdiction | Eldee-K argued California treats the doctrine as venue and state rules permitting intra-state transfer show it is non-jurisdictional | Court relied on Supreme Court precedent (Ellenwood) and Ninth Circuit law to treat the doctrine as jurisdictional for federal courts | Held jurisdictional: state characterization informs whether action is local, but federal courts remain bound to dismiss local actions involving out-of-state realty for lack of jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Casey v. Adams, 102 U.S. 66 (discussion that local actions must be brought where the thing lies)
- Ellenwood v. Marietta Chair Co., 158 U.S. 105 (local actions for trespass on land must be brought in the state where land lies)
- Stone v. United States, 167 U.S. 178 (distinguishing transitory conversion claims from local trespass claims)
- Huntington v. Attrill, 146 U.S. 657 (state law governs whether action is local or transitory)
- Ophir Silver Mining Co. v. Superior Court, 147 Cal. 467 (California recognition that actions affecting out-of-state realty are local)
- Strosnider v. Pomin, 32 Cal. App. 2d 103 (California court treating fraud claim as local where damages flow from injury to real property)