Firstenberg v. City of Santa Fe
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 20949
10th Cir.2012Background
- Firstenberg, an EHS sufferer in Santa Fe, sued the City and AT&T over 3G upgrades increasing RF exposure and alleged a duty to regulate under Santa Fe’s Land Development Code § 14-3.6(B)(4)(b).
- AT&T had prior special exceptions for base stations; upgrades occurred in November 2010 without new extra exceptions.
- Firstenberg filed a state mandamus petition; he claimed the City must enforce § 14-3.6(B)(4)(b) and regulate intensification of use.
- The case was removed to federal court on federal-question grounds; the district court dismissed for failure to state a claim and on preemption/ADA/Constitution grounds.
- The district court and later appellate briefing raised jurisdictional questions under 28 U.S.C. § 1331; the panel held the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.
- The court reversed, remanding with instructions to vacate and return the case to state court, noting no decision on the merits or preemption defense.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the complaint show federal-question jurisdiction under § 1331? | Firstenberg relies on ADA/Constitution references and anticipated defenses to imply federal questions. | Preemption/ADA considerations imply federal questions; federal defenses can render jurisdiction proper. | No; well-pleaded complaint shows only a state-law claim, not a federal question. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell v. Hood, 327 F.2d 678 (U.S. 1946) (well-pleaded complaint rule requires federal question on the face of the complaint)
- Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1987) (federal defenses, including preemption, do not create federal-question jurisdiction)
- Nicodemus v. Union Pac. Corp., 440 F.3d 1227 (10th Cir. 2006) (well-pleaded complaint must show federal creation or reliance on federal law)
- Gully v. First National Bank, 299 U.S. 109 (U.S. 1936) (state-law claim cannot arise under federal law merely because federal issues lurk in the background)
- Grable & Sons Metal Prods., Inc. v. Darue Eng’g & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308 (U.S. 2005) (federal-question jurisdiction exists when resolution of a state-law claim depends on a federal issue)