Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Natalie and Nicolas LaFave sued the companies managing their military-family housing after their 30-month-old son fell from a second-story window and died. They alleged that a window fall-prevention device had stopped working consistently and brought a California wrongful-death claim in San Diego Superior Court.
The housing companies removed the case to federal court. They relied principally on federal-enclave jurisdiction, a doctrine that can make federal law controlling when the United States acquired exclusive legislative authority over land. The dispute therefore turned not on whether the home was associated with the military, but on the legal status of the particular parcel and the State of California’s cession of authority.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted remand. The defendants had the burden to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction, and evidence that the residence was within or connected to a military installation did not establish that the United States held exclusive legislative jurisdiction over the property. The court distinguished ownership or operational control from the formal constitutional steps needed to create a federal enclave.
The court also rejected alternative theories based on a substantial federal question and the federal-officer removal statute. A state-law premises-liability dispute did not necessarily raise a disputed and substantial federal issue, and the private property managers did not show that the challenged conduct was performed under sufficiently detailed federal direction. Because the removal predicates failed, the merits belong in state court.
Key Takeaways
- Military ownership, leasing, or location alone does not prove federal-enclave jurisdiction.
- The removing party must trace the parcel’s jurisdictional history and establish the federal government’s exclusive authority.
- Federal contractual oversight does not automatically turn a private housing manager into a federal officer for removal.
- A complaint framed entirely under California tort law ordinarily remains a state-law case unless a federal issue is necessarily embedded in the claim.
Why It Matters
California practitioners litigating injuries in privatized military housing should investigate deeds, cession statutes, acceptance records, and the precise boundaries of any claimed enclave before choosing or challenging a forum. The order also underscores that federal connections in the facts are not a substitute for a statutory basis for removal.