Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Cook v. Lankford
Citation: 17 F. App'x 351Docket: No. 00-5413
Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; August 21, 2001; Federal Appellate Court
A pro se litigant, Dale F. Cook Sr., appeals a district court's denial of his motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) following the court's remand of his case to the Chancery Court of Meigs County, Tennessee. Cook initially filed suit to prevent the development of a Cherokee National Park, naming Meigs County Executive Garland Lankford as a defendant. He later amended his complaint to include the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and two TVA employees, subsequently attempting to remove the case to federal court. On January 14, 2000, the district court remanded the case back to state court, citing that a plaintiff cannot remove a civil action (28 U.S.C. § 1441(a)), referencing the precedent set in Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets. Cook’s motion to alter the remand order was denied for lack of jurisdiction and because it was based on false premises, rendering it frivolous. The district court also denied his motion for default judgment against TVA and the TVA employees as moot, since the case was no longer pending in federal court. Cook's appeal reiterates the arguments made in the district court. The appellate review concluded that the district court acted appropriately in denying both motions. The remand order effectively stripped the federal court of jurisdiction, and such remand orders are not subject to appeal (28 U.S.C. § 1447(d)). Additionally, since the case was remanded, there was no basis for a default judgment in the federal court. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, aligning with the reasoning provided in the district court's memorandum and order.