S Sidney Mandel et al v. Grubb and Ellis Realty Investors LLC et al

Filing 74

ORDER by Judge Cormac J. Carney remanding case to Orange County Superior, Case number 30-02011-00449598. Mailed certified copy of Order, docket sheet and CV 103. Case Terminated. Made JS-6 (Attachments: # 1 CV 103) (twdb)

1 CADDEN & FULLER LLP

Thomas H. Cadden, Bar No. 122299

JS-6

2 H. Daniel Fuller, Bar No. 105758

Charlene A. Busch, Bar No. 124200
3 Johanna S. Wilson, Bar No. 222686
114 Pacifica, Suite 450
4 Irvine, California 92618-3326
Telephone: [phone]
5 Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for all Plaintiffs
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

SOUTHERN DIVISION
S. SIDNEY MANDEL and PAUL D. ) Case No. SACV 11-1940-CJC (ANx)
BERNSTEIN, in their capacity as Co- ) The Honorable Cormac J. Carney
Trustees of the Sidney J. Bernstein Trust )
dated November 25, 1987 for the benefit )
of Elaine S. Bernstein, the Sidney J.
)
Bernstein Trust dated November 25,
) ORDER REMANDING CASE TO
1987 for the benefit of Paul D.
)
Bernstein, and the Sidney J. Bernstein ) STATE COURT
Trust dated November 25, 1987 for the )
benefit of Anne L. Bernstein, et al.
)
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
)
(Unlimited Civil Case)
)
vs.
) Complaint Filed: February 14, 2011
)
NNN REALTY INVESTORS, LLC,
) Trial Date:
None Set
(doing business as, and formerly known )
as, GRUBB & ELLIS REALTY
)
INVESTORS, LLC, also formerly
)
known as Triple Net Properties, LLC), a )
Virginia limited liability company; et
)
al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

25
26

WHEREAS, plaintiffs in the above-captioned case (“Plaintiffs”) commenced

27 this action in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange on
28 February 14, 2011;
-1-

_______________________________________________________________________
ORDER

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs, on November 22, 2011, filed a Second Amended

1

2 Complaint (“SAC”) which, among other things, added claims under Sections 10(b)
3 and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;

WHEREAS, on December 15, 2011, defendants Grubb & Ellis Company and

4

5 Michael J. Rispoli filed a Notice of Removal of this action to the United States
6 District Court for the Central District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section
7 1441 on the grounds that the added claims in the SAC provided exclusive federal
8 question jurisdiction (15 U.S.C. § 78aa);

WHEREAS, on January 13, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a motion (1) for leave to

9

10 file a third amended complaint to, among other things, remove the federal securities
11 claims, and (2) remand the case back to state court (“Motion”);

WHEREAS, before Plaintiffs’ Motion was heard, on February 23, 2012, an

12

13 order was issued inactivating this case following the February 22, 2012 filing of
14 Grubb & Ellis Company’s Suggestion of Bankruptcy;

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2014, an order was entered by the United States

15

16 Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, lifting the automatic stay
17 as to Plaintiffs in order to proceed with this action against Parent and Grubb & Ellis
18 Securities Inc.;

WHEREAS, on May 22, 2014 an order was granted restoring this case to

19

20 active status;

WHEREAS, on June 26, 2014, this Court issued a minute order allowing

21

22 Plaintiffs to file a Third Amended Complaint and giving Plaintiffs until July 21,
23 2014 to file a motion to remand this case back to state court;

WHEREAS, the Third Amended Complaint, filed with leave of this Court on

24

25 July 2, 2014 no longer contains any claims providing exclusive federal question
26 jurisdiction (15 U.S.C. § 78aa);

WHEREAS, there also do not exist grounds for diversity jurisdiction;

27
28 ///

-2-

_______________________________________________________________________
ORDER

1

WHEREAS, on July 14, 2014, the parties in the above-captioned matter filed

2 a Stipulation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(c)(3) to remand this case back to Orange
3 County Superior Court of the State of California (the “Stipulation”);
4

NOW THEREFORE, having considered and reviewed the parties’

5 Stipulation, and having heard all of the arguments, and good cause appearing, the
6 Court ORDERS as follows:
7

1.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3), this action is immediately

8 REMANDED to the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange.
9

2.

The parties shall bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees incurred in

10 connection with the removal of this action and other proceedings in this Court.
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

DATED: July 15, 2014

15
16
17
18

_________________________________________
THE HONORABLE CORMAC J. CARNEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

_______________________________________________________________________
ORDER