14. Should the court grant the motion to remand?

Removal of a civil action from state to federal court is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). The federal court must have subject-matter jurisdiction over the claim, based on diversity or federal question jurisdiction. Additionally, a defendant seeking to remove to federal court must file a notice of removal in the district court where the state action is pending. This means that the proper venue for removal is the federal district court located in the state where the original case was filed.

C is correct. The federal judge should grant the motion to remand because the librarian filed the notice of removal in federal district court in State B, but the action was pending in state court in State A. Thus, the librarian sought removal to the incorrect court and the action should proceed in state court in State A.

A is incorrect. Although the fact that the parties are diverse would have supported removal based on diversity jurisdiction, the venue requirement of removal still applies and, as explained above, removal is only proper to the district court where the state action is pending.

B is incorrect. This answer correctly indicates that the federal court would have diversity jurisdiction over the parties because they are diverse (the teacher is a citizen of State A and the librarian is a citizen of State B) and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. However, this choice is incorrect because removal is properly accomplished by filing the notice of removal in the district court where the state action is pending. Here, because the librarian removed the case to the wrong federal court, the action should proceed in State A's state court.

D is incorrect. The issue in this question is the proper venue for removal and whether the court should remand the case to state court. Neither the facts nor the call indicates a need to conduct an analysis of personal jurisdiction.