Mc Erlain v. Park Plaza Towers Owners Association et al

Filing 112

ORDER VACATING HEARING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. The Court will reset the hearing date, as appropriate, after determining whether the Court is required to abstain. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on October 29, 2014.(mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/29/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11

PATRICK MCERLAIN,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

No. C-13-3232 MMC
ORDER VACATING HEARING ON
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v.
PARK PLAZA TOWERS OWNERS
ASSOCIATION, et al.,

15
Defendants.
16

/

17
18

Before the Court are two motions filed by defendants:1 (1) “Motion for Summary

19

Judgment or Alternatively Summary Adjudication,” filed September 24, 2014 and noticed

20

for hearing on October 31, 2014; and (2) “Motion to Dismiss,” filed October 6, 2014 and

21

noticed for hearing on November 14, 2014.

22

In the first of the above-referenced motions, said defendants argue they are entitled

23

to judgment on the merits. In the second of the above-referenced motions, said defendants

24

argue that the Court must abstain from deciding the merits of the instant action in light of a

25

pending state court action, under the doctrine set forth in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37

26

(1971).

27
1

28

Defendants are Joseph Schreurs, Ladonna Horwitz, Nyla Starr, Sherry Berenstein,
Julie Robles, Cynthia Schreurs, Tracy Fallon, Norma Berliner-Saltz, Tim Ho, Dennis Gale,
David Behling, and Behling Property Management Corporation.

1

As the Ninth Circuit had held, “if the district court is required to abstain under

2

Younger,” the district court “has no authority” to rule on the merits of the claim. See

3

Meredith v Oregon, 321 F.3d 807, 816 (9th Cir. 2003). Consequently, if, as defendants

4

contend, the Court is required to abstain under Younger, then the Court has no authority to

5

determine whether, as defendants also contend, they are entitled to judgment on the

6

merits.

7

Under such circumstances, the Court hereby VACATES the October 31, 2014

8

hearing on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The Court will reset the hearing

9

date, as appropriate, after determining whether the Court is required to abstain under

10
11

Younger.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

Dated: October 29, 2014
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2