Hitchens v. Doll

Filing 34

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

Download PDF
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

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?