Arora

Arora v. Hartford Life and Annuity Ins. Co.

Good Law

519 F. Supp. 2d 1021·2007 WL 2938184·42 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2438·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77297

United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 9, 2007C 07-01695 JSWCalifornia2,606 words

Opinion

White, J.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND AND DECLINING TO RULE ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO DISQUALIFY COUNSEL

Now before the Court are several motions: Plaintiffs’ motion to remand based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Defendant Wells Fargo Bank’s motion to dismiss and Defendant Hartford Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss and Plaintiffs’ motion to disqualify counsel. Having considered the parties’ pleadings, relevant legal authority, and having had the benefit of oral argument, the Court HEREBY GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motion to remand based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction and therefore declines to rule on the remaining motions.

BACKGROUND

Defendants removed this action to federal court based on the alleged preemption of Plaintiffs’ claims by the Employee Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 , et seq. Plaintiffs, owners of Vendmart, Inc. and PMA Enterprises, LLC in the business of selling vending machines and operating a gas station and convenience store, allege that the various Defendants helped Plaintiffs set up a company, MRJ Resources, Inc. in order to purchase life insurance policies for Plaintiffs P. Singh and Maninder Arora. According to the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.