In most Fair Debt Collection Practices Act cases that are started in state court and then removed to federal court, it is the defendant — usually a collection operation of some kind — that is seeking to have the case heard before a federal judge. This time, it’s the other way around. A defendant in a collection lawsuit had his attempt to remove the case to federal court denied by a District Court judge, who ordered the case remanded back to the state court where it started.
The Background: The defendant was sued by the plaintiff for an unpaid credit card debt. The defendant removed the case to federal court, arguing that it should be heard by a District Court judge because the plaintiff allegedly violated the FDCPA and the defendant was going to make that assertion in a counterclaim. The defendant claims the plaintiff filed its lawsuit seeking to collect on the debt before responding to his dispute of the debt.
- A Magistrate Court judge ordered the defendant to show cause and make his case why this suit should be heard in federal court. His primary argument was that he was invoking a federal law.
The Ruling: Unfortunately for the plaintiff, federal court jurisdiction can not be invoked on the basis of a defense or a counterclaim, noted Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley of the District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. If the defendant wants to have his case heard in federal court, he will need to file a separate lawsuit against the plaintiff.
