From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Golden West Foreclosure Service, Inc. v. 3066 Market Street, Ll

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 18, 2014
C-14-2154-WHO (N.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2014)

Opinion

          MELINDA HAAG, United States Attorney, THOMAS MOORE, Chief, Tax Division, THOMAS NEWMAN, Assistant United States Attorney, San Francisco, California, Attorneys for United States of America.

          CHERYL ROUSE, Attorney for Plaintiff GOLDEN WEST FORECLOSURE SERVICE, INC.


          STIPULATION TO REMAND CASE

          WILLIAM H. ORRICK, District Judge.

         The parties stipulate as follows:

         1. Defendant, the United States, removed this case from the Superior Court of California on May 9, 2014, as case number CGC-14-538585.

         2. The facts contained in this stipulation are not intended to be binding, except that defendant the United States disclaims an interest in the proceeds from the sale of real property that was sold and is the subject of this action.

         3. Because this case involves property that the IRS may claim an interest, the United States removed the case from state court as there was a federal claim related to the federal tax lien on the subject property. The action was removed by defendant the United States of America pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442(a)(1) and 1444.

         4. Since the removal was filed, counsel for the United States has discussed this action with plaintiffs' counsel. The United States' claim to the proceeds from the real property sale is the sole basis for federal jurisdiction. In addition, it appears as though there may be significant or numerous state law issues and the United States hereby disclaims an interest in the property at issue in this case. For that reason, it the state law issues are more predominant and the there is no federal issue that would permit federal jurisdiction over this case.

         5. Based on the foregoing, the parties agree that this case should be remanded the County of San Francisco Superior Court, and any pending hearing in this Court should be vacated.

          ORDER

         Based on the parties' stipulation, the Court finds that the issues in this case arise predominantly under state law. A district court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction where "the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction." See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); see also Bryant v. Adventist Health System/West , 289 F.3d 1162, 1169 (9th Cir. 2002) (holding where district court grants judgment on federal claims, district court, pursuant to § 1367(c)(3), may properly decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over remaining state law claims). Further, a district court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over claims that "substantially predominate[ ] over the claim or claims over which the district court has original jurisdiction." See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(2). The Court DECLINES to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.

         Accordingly, the above-titled action is hereby REMANDED in its entirely to the Superior Court of California, in and for the County of San Francisco, and the Clerk is DIRECTED to transfer forthwith the instant order, at the following address:

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Golden West Foreclosure Service, Inc. v. 3066 Market Street, Ll

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 18, 2014
C-14-2154-WHO (N.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2014)
Case details for

Golden West Foreclosure Service, Inc. v. 3066 Market Street, Ll

Case Details

Full title:GOLDEN WEST FORECLOSURE SERVICE, INC., a CALIFORNIA CORPORATION…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Aug 18, 2014

Citations

C-14-2154-WHO (N.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2014)