Hitchens v. Doll

Filing 34

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Stephan M. Vidmar regarding motion hearing on January 23, 2017. (am)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
CYNTHIA HITCHENS,
Plaintiff,
v.

No. 16-cv-0576 SMV/KK

NANCY DOLL,
Defendant.
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment or, in
the Alternative, Dismissal with Prejudice [Doc. 29] (“MSJ”), filed on October 28, 2016. An
in-person hearing is set for January 23, 2017. See [Doc. 33]. At the hearing, counsel must be
prepared to argue the MSJ and additionally to address:


whether Defendant’s counterclaim for revocation of inheritance is barred by the probate
exception to federal jurisdiction, see Marshall v. Marshall, 547 U.S. 293, 311–12 (2006);
and



whether Plaintiff will stipulate that the Settlement Agreement attached as Exhibit A to
Defendant’s Answer . . . and Counterclaims, [Doc. 9] at 8–14, is a true and accurate copy
of the Settlement Agreement at issue in this case, and if not, precisely and specifically
what distinguishes it from a true and accurate copy.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_____________________________
STEPHAN M. VIDMAR
United States Magistrate Judge
Presiding by Consent