Pratt

Pratt v. Higgins

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 24, 20244:22-cv-04228California1,033 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 DAVID PRATT, Case No. 22-cv-04228-HSG

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

REMAND

v. Re: Dkt. No. 97 ROBERT C. HIGGINS, et al., Defendants.

13 Before the Court is a motion to remand filed by Defendants Robert Higgins (“Mr. Higgins”), Sharon Higgins (“Mrs. Higgins”), and Green Garden Group, LLC (“3GL”). Dkt. No. 97 (“Mot.”). Plaintiff and Counter-defendant David Pratt (“Mr. Pratt”) responded to the motion. Dkt. No. 108. The Court finds the motion appropriate for disposition without oral argument and it is deemed submitted. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS the motion to remand. Defendants move to remand this case to Sonoma County Superior Court. Defendants initially removed the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) based on diversity jurisdiction. See Dkt. No. 1 at 2. But Defendants now argue that removal was improper and the case must be remanded because Mr. Pratt and 3GL are both…

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.