Baker

Baker v. BDO Seidman, L.L.P.

Good Law
390 F. Supp. 2d 919·2005 WL 2387494
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 2005C-05-2500 EMCCalifornia3,054 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chen, J.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR REMAND TO STATE COURT (Docket No. 13)

Plaintiffs in this action are six individuals who hired Defendants to provide tax services and investment advice. Plaintiffs initially filed suit against Defendants in state court. Subsequently, Defendants removed the ease to federal court on the basis that, even though Plaintiffs pled only state law claims, there was a substantial federal issue involved in the case. Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion to remand the case to state court. Having considered the parties’ briefs and accompanying submissions as well as the argument of counsel, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion for remand.

I. FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On May 12, 2005, Plaintiffs filed suit in San Francisco Superior Court, alleging six causes of action against Defendants: (1) professional negligence, (2) breach of fiduciary duty, (3) fraud and deceit, (4) negligent misrepresentation, (5) violation of California Business & Professions Code § 17200, and (6) declaratory relief on an arbitration clause. Basically, there are two allegations underlying the primary claims the first five causes of action): first, that Defendants…

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.