×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
North Carolina Didn't Waive Sovereign Immunity by Removing State Action to Federal Court
North Carolina Didn't Waive Sovereign Immunity by Removing State Action to
Federal Court
Charles Stewart, chief of security for the North Carolina Department of
Correction (NCDOC), was implicated in a double-billing scheme, which a
newspaper reported. Although a later investigation exonerated Stewart, he
was transferred to another post. Stewart sued numerous NCDOC officials in
state court, seeking monetary damages on both state and federal legal
theories. The state had the case removed to a federal district court which
dismissed the state law claims except for those for intentional tort and
gross negligence, and dismissed some of the federal claims against the
defendants in their individual capacities. The defendants appealed.
On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit considered
whether the defendants had waived their right to claim sovereign immunity
by removing the case to federal court. It found that the state never
consented to be sued in state court on the remaining state law claims, and
that simply removing the case to federal court didn't amount to consent.
The case was remanded with instructions to dismiss the remaining state law
claims and to proceed on the federal claims against the defendants in their
individual capacities. See: Stewart v. North Carolina, 393 F.3d 484 (4th
Cir. 2005).
Federal Court
Charles Stewart, chief of security for the North Carolina Department of
Correction (NCDOC), was implicated in a double-billing scheme, which a
newspaper reported. Although a later investigation exonerated Stewart, he
was transferred to another post. Stewart sued numerous NCDOC officials in
state court, seeking monetary damages on both state and federal legal
theories. The state had the case removed to a federal district court which
dismissed the state law claims except for those for intentional tort and
gross negligence, and dismissed some of the federal claims against the
defendants in their individual capacities. The defendants appealed.
On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit considered
whether the defendants had waived their right to claim sovereign immunity
by removing the case to federal court. It found that the state never
consented to be sued in state court on the remaining state law claims, and
that simply removing the case to federal court didn't amount to consent.
The case was remanded with instructions to dismiss the remaining state law
claims and to proceed on the federal claims against the defendants in their
individual capacities. See: Stewart v. North Carolina, 393 F.3d 484 (4th
Cir. 2005).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login