Sanchez v. Metropolitan Group Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Filing
13
ORDER Granting 11 Stipulation to Remand to State Court. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 8/16/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: Certified Copy of Order and Docket Sheet sent to State Court - MR)
JOHN T.KEATING
Nevada Bar No. 6373
COLIN P. CAVANAUGH
Nevada Bar No. 13842
KEATING law group
9130 W. Russell Road, Suite 200
4
5
6
7
8
Las Vegas, Nevada 89148
ikeating@keatinglg.com
ccavanaugh@keatinglg.com
(702) 228-6800 phone
(702) 228-0443 facsimile
Attorneys for Defendant
Metropolitan Group Property
and Casualty Insurance Company
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Q_
11
D
o
BENJIE SANCHEZ,
CASE NO.:
2:17-cv-01945-RFB-PAL
12
Plaintiff,
OS CO
UJ ^
S
13
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO REMAND TO
STATE COURT
vs.
X.QQ
—I a <
_
14
-i Gj
15
Zi/l <
D O
_**
16
^ E2
GROUP
PROPERTY
AND
through X; and ROE CORPORATIONS XI
through XX,
17
LU
METROPOLITAN
CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY; DOES I
18
Defendants.
19
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff BENJIE SANCHEZ and Defendant
20
METROPOLITAN GROUP PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY by and through
21
their respective counsel, that this matter shall be remanded back to State Court, on the following
22
terms:
23
1.
This action was originally filed in state court, namely the Eighth Judicial District
24
Court of Clark County, Nevada, Case No. A-17-757557-C, and Defendant removed it to Federal
25
Court on or about July 17, 2017, on the basis of diversity jurisdiction.
26
27
28
2.
On or about July 28,2017, Defendant filed a Motionto Dismiss Plaintiff's Second,
Third and Fourth Causes of Action, respectively for Breach of Covenant of Good Faith/Insurance
Bad Faith, Violation of Unfair Claims Practices Act, and Negligent and/or Intentional
Misrepresentation.
3.
On or about August 11, 2017, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint. The First
Amended Complaint alleges only a single cause of action for Breach of Contract and no longer
contains the three above-referenced causes of action at issue in Defendant's Motion to Dismiss.
The First Amended Complaint also alleges that the amount in controversy is not greater than
$50,000, exclusive of attorney's fees, interest and court costs.
WHEREFOR, the parties hereby stipulate that this matter shall be remanded back to state
court in the Eighth Judicial District Court of Clark County, Nevada, Case No. A-17-757557-C, to
10
proceed through Nevada's arbitration program under NRS 38.250, et seq.
Q_
11
D
DATED this 15th day of August, 2017.
o •
DATED this 15th day of August, 2017.
12
^
Q Q
—I a <
_
HENNESS&HAIGHT
Bv: /S/COLIN P. CAVANAUGH
Bv:/S/SHAUN M.ROSE
Shaun M. Rose, Esq.
14
-i Gj
15
- ^ l/) <
D O
_*>
H*3
LU
KEATING law group
COLIN P. CAVANAUGH
13
16
17
18
19
Nevada Bar No.: 13842
Nevada Bar No. 13945
9130 W. Russell Road, Ste. 200
8972 Spanish Ridge Avenue
Las Vegas NV 89148
Attorney for Defendant
Metropolitan Group Property and
Casualty insurance Company
Las Vegas, Nevada 89148
Attorneys for Plaintiff
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
(Order on following page.)
28
Benjie Sanchez
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, that this matter shall
3
be remanded back to state court in the Eighth Judicial District Court of Clark County, Nevada,
4
Case No. A-17-757557-C, to proceed through Nevada's arbitration program under NRS 38.250,
etseq.
All matters and deadlines currently set in this federal action are taken off calendar.
DATED this 16th day of August
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
United States District Judge
10
Q_
11
D
o
12
Respectfully Submitted by:
13
KEATING law group
osffl
UJ ^
> §5
> 3«
14
_
-i Gj
t/> (/>
15
Z(/) <
_*>
I—o^
LU
16
/S/COLIN P. CAVANAUGH
COLIN P. CAVANAUGH
Nevada Bar No.: 13842
9130 W. Russell Road, Ste. 200
17
Las Vegas NV 89148
Attorneys for Defendant
18
Metropolitan Group Property and
Casualty insurance Company
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
, 2017.
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?