Lone Mountain Ranch, LLC v. Santa Fe Gold Corp.
988 F. Supp. 2d 1263
D.N.M.2013Background
- Plaintiffs filed in state court seeking declaratory judgment on rights under a split estate deed regarding public participation in a proposed Lone Mountain Ranch mining operation.
- Defendants Ortiz Mines leased mineral rights to Santa Fe Gold; Ortiz Mines and Santa Fe Gold are diverse with plaintiffs from Delaware and California.
- Ortiz Mines removed the case to federal court on diversity and possibly federal-question grounds.
- Plaintiffs moved to remand arguing forum defendant rule bar, lack of amount in controversy, and no federal question.
- Court considers removal standards and finds forum defendant rule bars removal due to Santa Fe Gold being a New Mexico citizen.
- Court ultimately remands the case to state court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Forum Defendant Rule bar removal here? | Estrin argues Santa Fe Gold’s New Mexico citizenship prevents removal. | Ortiz Mines contends Santa Fe Gold not properly served; removal valid. | Forum Defendant Rule bars removal even if Santa Fe Gold unserved. |
| Is there a federal question to support removal? | Plaintiffs reference First Amendment rights to participate in proceedings as a federal question basis. | No federal-question basis; defenses cannot create jurisdiction. | No federal-question jurisdiction; not grounds for removal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fajen v. Found. Reserve Ins. Co., 683 F.2d 331, 683 F.2d 331 (10th Cir. 1982) (federal question requires face of complaint; well-pleaded rule applied)
- Devon Energy Prod. Co., L.P. v. Mosaic Potash Carlsbad, Inc., 693 F.3d 1195, 693 F.3d 1195 (10th Cir. 2012) (well-pleaded complaint rule; declaratory-judgment context considers potential action)
- Cardtoons, L.C. v. Major League Baseball Players Ass’n, 95 F.3d 959, 95 F.3d 959 (10th Cir. 1996) (determines federal-question jurisdiction in declaratory actions)
- Public Serv. Comm’n v. Wycoff Co., 344 U.S. 237, 344 U.S. 237 (1952) (well-pleaded basis for federal question in declaratory actions)
- Laughlin v. Kmart Corp., 50 F.3d 871, 50 F.3d 871 (10th Cir. 1995) (presumption against removal jurisdiction; burdens on removal)