Roskind

Roskind v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Company

Good Law
165 F. Supp. 2d 1059·2001 WL 376488·2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4528
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 11, 200101-0541California3,409 words

Opinion

Opinion

Conti, J.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND

I. INTRODUCTION

Before the Court is Plaintiffs motion, filed on March 8, 2001, to remand this case to the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, where it was originally filed. Specifically, Plaintiff contends Defendant’s removal on January 17, 2001 was untimely arid there is no federal subject matter jurisdiction over his claims. Plaintiff also seeks to recover the costs incurred as a result of the removal.

II. BACKGROUND

The procedural and substantive history of this case spans two and a half years. In brief, Plaintiff filed a class-action suit in the Superior Court of California for the County of San Francisco on September 8, 1998. The complaint alleges that Defendant breached its fiduciary duty and engaged in unfair business acts by failing to execute sell orders at the best available price and by trading ahead of its clients. Complaint ¶ 2. According to the complaint, on February 8, 1996, Plaintiff instructed Defendant, his broker, to sell 14,000 shares of Netscape for at least $65 per share at market open. Complaint ¶ 21. Although Defendant received the order prior to the market’s opening, Defendant waited 77…

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.