Mario H. Cabrera et al v. Martinez & Associates, LLC. et al

Filing 9

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 1/27/2012 REMANDING CASE to Kern County Superior Court. Certified Copy of remand order sent to other court. CASE CLOSED. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 Lenden F. Webb (SBN 236377) Amy R. Lovegren-Tipton (SBN 258697) Manuel E. Ignacio (SBN 279191) WEBB & BORDSON, APC 466 W. Fallbrook Ave. Suite 102 Fresno, CA 93711 Telephone: (559) 431-4888 Facsimile: (559) 821-4500 Email: MIgnacio@WBLawGroup.com 5 6 Attorney for Plaintiffs, MARIO H. CABRERA, an individual, and ROSA CABRERA, an individual 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION 8 9 10 WEBB & BORDSON, APC 466 West Fallbrook Avenue, Suite 102 Fresno, California 93711 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) ) MARTINEZ & ASSOCIATES, LLC, dba MARIO’S BODY SHOP SUPPLIES; JOSE ) MANRIQUEZ, dba MARIO’S BODY SHOP ) ) SUPPLIES; and DOES 1 through 25, ) inclusive, ) ) Defendants. ) MARIO H. CABRERA and ROSA CABRERA, CASE NO.: 1:11-CV-01782-LJO-JLT STIPULATION TO REMAND CASE BACK TO KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT; ORDER THEREON 18 19 Plaintiffs MARIO H. CABRERA, an Individual; and ROSA CABRERA, 20 an Individual (“CABRERA”); Defendant MARTINEZ & ASSOCIATES, LLC, dba 21 MARIO’S BODY SHOP SUPPLIES (“MARTINEZ”) and Defendant JOSE 22 MANRIQUEZ, dba MARIO’S BODY SHOP SUPPLIES (“MANRIQUEZ”) 23 (collectively “Parties”) by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby 24 stipulate and agree as follows: 25 26 STIPULATION 1. On July 20, 2011, Plaintiffs commenced an action in the Superior Court 27 of California, County of Kern entitled Mario H. Cabrera and Rose Cabrera v. Martinez 28 & Associates, LLC dba Mario’s Body Shop Supplies, Jose Manriquez, dba Mario’s Body STIPULATION TO REMAND CASE; ORDER THEREON -1- 1 Shop Supplies, et al bearing Kern County Case No. S-1500-CL-261230 (hereinafter “the 2 Action”). 2. 3 4 Removal of the Action to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1446. 3. 5 6 “While the failure of one defendant to consent renders the removal defective, each defendant need not necessarily sign the notice of removal. (Citation omitted.) There must, however, be some timely filed written indication from each served defendant, or some person with authority to act on the defendant’s behalf, indicating that the defendant has actually consented to the removal.” (Getty Oil Corporation, Succeeded by and a Division of Texaco, Inc. v. Insurance Company of North America 841 F.2d 1254 (Fifth Circuit 1988) (Emphasis added.) 8 9 10 11 WEBB & BORDSON, APC Defendant MARTINEZ has not consented to Removal in this case and therefore the required unanimity of Defendants for Removal is absent: 7 466 West Fallbrook Avenue, Suite 102 Fresno, California 93711 On or about October 26, 2011, Defendant MANRIQUEZ filed a Notice of 12 4. In addition, after discussion among the Parties, it was discovered that 13 there is no triable cause of action to be heard before the Eastern District Court and that 14 the matter should be remanded to the Kern County Superior Court. The parties agree 15 that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the facts of this case do not 16 satisfy the jurisdictional requirements of the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act (12 17 U.S.C. §5220). 18 5. The parties hereto stipulate that the Action should be remanded to Kern 19 County Superior Court. 20 6. The parties further stipulate that each party shall bear its own attorneys’ 21 fees and costs with respect to the removal and subsequent remand of the Action pursuant 22 to this Stipulation and Order. 23 24 25 /// 26 27 /// 28 /// STIPULATION TO REMAND CASE; ORDER THEREON -2- 1 2 Dated: January 25, 2012 WEBB & BORDSON, APC 3 4 By: __/Manuel E. Ignacio/_______ Manuel E. Ignacio Attorney for Plaintiffs MARIO H. CABRERA and ROSA CABRERA 5 6 7 8 9 10 WEBB & BORDSON, APC 466 West Fallbrook Avenue, Suite 102 Fresno, California 93711 11 12 Dated: January 26, 2012 13 GATTUSO & KUMMER By: _/Dixon G. Kummer/_______ Dixon G. Kummer Attorney for Defendant MARTINEZ & ASSOCIATES, LLC, dba MARIO’S BODY SHOP SUPPLIES 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Dated: January 26, 2012 23 24 By:__/Jose Manriquez/______________ JOSE MANRIQUEZ, dba MARIO’S BODY SHOP SUPPLIES, Defendant In Pro Per 25 /// 26 27 /// 28 /// STIPULATION TO REMAND CASE; ORDER THEREON -3- 1 ORDER 2 3 On January 26, 2012 the Parties to the above-referenced action filed a Stipulation 4 to Remand Removed Action. The Court having reviewed that Stipulation and good cause 5 appearing, Orders as follows: 6 1. The Parties’ Stipulation is approved; 7 2. Eastern District of California, Case No. 11-cv-1782-LJO-JLT styled 8 MARIO H. CABRERA AND ROSA CABRERA v. MARTINEZ & ASSOCIATES, 9 LLC., dba MARIO’S BODY SHOP SUPPLIES; JOSE MANRIQUEZ, dba MARIO’S WEBB & BORDSON, APC BODY SHOP SUPPLIES; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive is hereby remanded to 11 466 West Fallbrook Avenue, Suite 102 Fresno, California 93711 10 Kern County Superior Court. 12 The clerk is directed to take necessary action to remand this action to 13 Kern County Superior Court. 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 17 18 Dated: January 27, 2012 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END: 19 66h44d 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION TO REMAND CASE; ORDER THEREON -4-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?