Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

HITCHENS v. DOLL, 16-cv-0576 SMV/KK. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. New Mexico Number: infdco20170113c89 Visitors: 17
Filed: Jan. 12, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 12, 2017
Summary: STEPHAN M. VIDMAR , Magistrate Judge . 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,
More

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.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer