719 F.3d 46
1st Cir.2013Background
- Macera borrowed from Nation One Mortgage, secured by a first Rhode Island mortgage naming MERS as mortgagee; MERS ostensibly assigned its interest to FNMA for foreclosure.
- Pawtucket Credit Union, as second mortgagee, purchased the foreclosed property and sought eviction remedies.
- Pawtucket sought to intervene under Rule 24(a)(2) and then moved to dismiss for lack of complete diversity under §1332.
- The district court stayed the matter under a Case Management order, rather than ruling on the diversity motion.
- Pawtucket appealed, challenging the injunction stay and the district court’s lack of docketing on the diversity motion.
- The First Circuit declined to decide the complete diversity issue here, instead remanding for district court adjudication consistent with In re: Mortgage Foreclosure.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stay constitutes an appealable injunction and supports interlocutory review. | Pawtucket argues the stay is an improper injunction blocking due process. | Macera contends the stay is properly reviewable under §1292(a)(1). | Stay reviewed as an injunction with interlocutory jurisdiction. |
| Whether there is complete diversity under 28 U.S.C. §1332. | Pawtucket claims lack complete diversity due to resident defendant. | Macera contends district court should assess jurisdictional diversity. | Remanded to district court to determine complete diversity. |
| Whether the district court erred in refusing to docket the diversity motion. | Pawtucket asserts failure to docket violates jurisdiction. | Macera pushes for district court to resolve later after remand. | Remanded for district court action on the jurisdictional issue. |
| Distinction between subject-matter and personal jurisdiction and waiver consequences. | Pawtucket challenges waiver of jurisdiction issues. | Macera emphasizes that subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived. | Court clarifies interests and leaves factual determinations to district court. |
Key Cases Cited
- Picciotto v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 512 F.3d 9 (1st Cir. 2008) (incomplete diversity defeats original jurisdiction for all claims)
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546 (2005) (incomplete diversity affects subject-matter jurisdiction)
- Gonzalez v. Thaler, 132 S. Ct. 641 (2012) (courts must consider sua sponte jurisdictional issues when jurisdiction is at stake)
- Ins. Co. of Ireland, Ltd. v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, 456 U.S. 694 (1982) (distinguishes personal from subject-matter jurisdiction and waiver)