State Bar of California v. Everett, 18-cv-05879-SI. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190204828
Visitors: 4
Filed: Feb. 01, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 01, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REMAND; REMANDING ACTION; AND IMPOSING SANCTIONS Re: Dkt. No. 6 SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Before the Court is plaintiff the State Bar of California's motion for remand and enforcement of sanctions, filed on October 5, 2018. Dkt. No. 6. Defendant Daniel Everett opposes the motion. 17-1716; Dkt. No. 63. 1 Having reviewed the papers, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS plaintiff's motion for remand and sanctions. As it has previously artic
Summary: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REMAND; REMANDING ACTION; AND IMPOSING SANCTIONS Re: Dkt. No. 6 SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Before the Court is plaintiff the State Bar of California's motion for remand and enforcement of sanctions, filed on October 5, 2018. Dkt. No. 6. Defendant Daniel Everett opposes the motion. 17-1716; Dkt. No. 63. 1 Having reviewed the papers, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS plaintiff's motion for remand and sanctions. As it has previously articu..
More
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REMAND; REMANDING ACTION; AND IMPOSING SANCTIONS
Re: Dkt. No. 6
SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.
Before the Court is plaintiff the State Bar of California's motion for remand and enforcement of sanctions, filed on October 5, 2018. Dkt. No. 6. Defendant Daniel Everett opposes the motion. 17-1716; Dkt. No. 63.1
Having reviewed the papers, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS plaintiff's motion for remand and sanctions. As it has previously articulated on three separate occasions, the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the underlying state attorney disciplinary claim. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for remand is GRANTED and this action is REMANDED to the California State Bar Court. Further, the Clerk is hereby instructed that no further notices of removal shall be accepted from Daniel Everett for filing without the approval of this Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Defendant requests additional time to oppose the motion. 17-1716; Dkt. No. 63; 18-5759; Dkt. Nos. 25, 28. Those requests are denied.
Source: Leagle
