Western Farm Credit Bank v. Hamakua Sugar Co., and Walter R. Schoettle

87 F.3d 1326 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. WESTERN FARM CREDIT BANK, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HAMAKUA SUGAR CO., Defendant, and Walter R. Schoettle, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-16686. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 11, 1996. * Decided June 17, 1996. Before: GOODWIN, PREGERSON and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Even though plaintiff's motion for summary judgment did not include "any evidence of the citizenship, domicile or even of the residence of any of the defendants," Blue Br. at 3, it was proper. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a) ("A party seeking to recover upon a claim ... may ... move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in the party's favor upon all or any part thereof.") (emphasis added); Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323-24 (1986). Defendant, in his response to plaintiff's motion, asserted that there was a factual dispute with regard to the existence of diversity jurisdiction because…