Filed: Oct. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 07, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO DISMISS INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE AND REMAND THIS ACTION TO STATE COURT ANTHONY W. ISHII , District Judge . On October 7, 2019, the parties filed the following stipulation: This Stipulation and Proposed Order is entered into between Plaintiff Jessica Barrios ("Plaintiff") and Defendant American Property Management, Inc. ("Defendant") (Plaintiff and Defendant all collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their counsel of record, as follows: WHEREAS Plaint
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO DISMISS INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE AND REMAND THIS ACTION TO STATE COURT ANTHONY W. ISHII , District Judge . On October 7, 2019, the parties filed the following stipulation: This Stipulation and Proposed Order is entered into between Plaintiff Jessica Barrios ("Plaintiff") and Defendant American Property Management, Inc. ("Defendant") (Plaintiff and Defendant all collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their counsel of record, as follows: WHEREAS Plainti..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO DISMISS INDIVIDUAL CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE AND REMAND THIS ACTION TO STATE COURT
ANTHONY W. ISHII, District Judge.
On October 7, 2019, the parties filed the following stipulation:
This Stipulation and Proposed Order is entered into between Plaintiff Jessica Barrios ("Plaintiff") and Defendant American Property Management, Inc. ("Defendant") (Plaintiff and Defendant all collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their counsel of record, as follows:
WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging class and individual claims against Defendant in the Superior Court of California for the County of Stanislaus, Case No. 2028910 on February 9, 2018 including claims for unlawful discrimination based on sex and wrongful termination in violation of public policy;
WHEREAS Defendant removed Plaintiff's lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on approximately March 12, 2018 solely based on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and on the value of Plaintiff's individual claims, with the remaining state law class claims being maintained through supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367;
WHEREAS the Parties have met and conferred regarding these matters and agreed that Plaintiffs' individual claims for unlawful retaliation, unlawful discrimination based upon sex, and wrongful termination in violation of public policy (Plaintiff's tenth, eleventh, and twelfth causes of action) should be dismissed with prejudice;
WHEREAS these dismissed claims were the basis for satisfying the amount in controversy requirements of original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332;
WHEREAS the Parties have met and conferred regarding these matters and agreed that supplemental jurisdiction of the remaining state law claims should be denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(2)-(3), Rodriguez v. Emeritus Corp., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151295 (E.D. Cal. 2018), and Ayala v. Infinity Ins. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75591 (C.D. Cal. 2010) and that the Court should remand the lawsuit back to the Superior Court of California for the County of Stanislaus, Case No. 2028910;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the Parties, subject to the approval of the Court, as follows:
1. That Plaintiff's tenth, eleventh, and twelfth causes of action should be dismissed with prejudice;
2. That the Court should decline supplemental jurisdiction of Plaintiff's remaining state law class action claims;
3. That this case will be remanded to the Superior Court of California for the County of Stanislaus, Case No. 2028910.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: October 7, 2019 LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS P. HOGAN
By: /s/ Shawnte Priest
Thomas P. Hogan
Shawnte Priest
(As Authorized 10/6/19)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: October 7, 2019 SHIMODA LAW CORP.
By: /s/ Justin P. Rodriguez
Galen T. Shimoda
Justin P. Rodriguez
Brittany V. Berzin
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: October 7, 2019 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
By: /s/ Derek S. Sachs
Derek S. Sachs
(As Authorized 10/7/19)
Adam P. Smith
Attorneys for Defendant
After consideration, the Court will give effect to the above stipulation.
ORDER
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's tenth, eleventh, and twelfth causes of action are dismissed with prejudice;
2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c), having dismissed Plaintiff's tenth, eleventh, and twelfth causes of action, the Court declines supplemental jurisdiction of Plaintiffs' remaining claims, which solely arise under state law; and 3. This case is REMANDED back to the Stanislaus County Superior Court, Case No. Case No. 2028910; and 4. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case and send a certified copy of this Order to the clerk of the Stanislaus County Superior Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
