Briano

Briano v. Conseco Life Insurance

Good Law
126 F. Supp. 2d 1293·2000 WL 1917976·2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20187
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaDecember 28, 2000EDCV 00-747 RT(CTX)California2,676 words

Opinion

Opinion

Timlin, J.

ORDER (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C § 1447(c) AND (2) REMANDING THE ACTION TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNAR-DINO.

The court, the Honorable Robert J. Tim-lin, has read and considered plaintiff Albert Briano (“Plaintiff’)’s motion (the “Motion”) for remand pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447 (c) (“Section 1447(c)”), defendants Conseco Life Insurance Co. and Philadelphia Life Insurance Co. (“Defendant’s”)’s opposition, and Plaintiffs reply.

i.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Ber-nardino County — Rancho Cucamonga District.

In the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges five state law-based causes of action, including a cause of action titled “Negligence” against Gorham Insurance Services, Inc. (“Gorham”). All five causes of action relate to the cancellation of a life insurance policy which was purchased through Gor-ham, an insurance agent and/or broker, and issued by Defendants. Plaintiff alleges that Gorham, “as Plaintiffs insurance agent and/or broker owed Plaintiff a duty of care in the administration and processing of 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.