Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01050/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01050-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TEAM ENTERPRISES, LLC., CASE NO. CV F 08-1050 LJO SMS

Plaintiff, ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO 

AMEND THE REMOVAL PETITION

vs.

WESTERN INVESTMENT REAL

ESTATE TRUST, et. al,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff Team Enterprises, LLC moves to amend the removal petition to add documents missing

from the Stanislaus County Superior Court file. Defendant Legacy Vulcan (“Vulcan”) filed its partial

opposition on October 6, 2008. Defendants Lynette F. Branagh, Gaylon C. Patterson, Marla J. Patterson,

Modesto Center Investors, LP, MCII, LP, and John A. Branagh filed a statement of non-opposition on

October 6, 2008. Defendants John A. Branagh, Lynette F. Branagh, MCII, LP, Modesto Center

Investors, LP, Gaylon C. Patterson, and Marla J. Patterson filed a statement of non-opposition on

October 6, 2008. The Court finds the motion suitable for decision without oral argument and without

a reply and herebyVACATES the hearing set for October 23, 2008. See Local Rule 78-230 (h). Having

considered the moving, partial opposition, and non-oppositions, as well as the Court’s file, the Court

issues the following order.

/////

/////

Case 1:08-cv-01050-LJO -SMS Document 52 Filed 10/08/08 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 The state court order amending the complaint to add “The Kirrberg Corporation” was the subject of multiple orders 1

in this Court. (See Doc. 30 and 33.) Therefore, the Court is familiar with the state court order regarding The Kirrberg

Corporation.

2

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

This action involves determining responsibility for soil and groundwater contamination near the

Century Shopping Center in Modesto, California. This case was originally filed in Stanislaus County

in September 2006 and was removed to this Court on July 21, 2008. The action was removed by

Defendant Legacy Vulcan and included documents served upon it. (Doc. 1, Notice of Removal, p. 1,

¶2.) In this motion, plaintiff states that numerous additional orders and pleadings were filed with the

state court during the pendency of the action in state court. (Doc.39, Motion to Amend p.2.) In

particular, an order naming The Kirrberg Corporation was filed with the state court. Attached to 1

plaintiff’s motion to amend the removal petition are the various documents sought to be amended to the

removal petition, including the order naming The Kirrberg Corporation.

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

A defendant filing a notice of removal must file with the notice of removal "a copy of all process,

pleadings, and orders served upon such defendant ... " 28 U.S.C. § 1446. The federal court takes the

action as it stood in the state court when removed. Thus, all existing orders—including rulings on

discovery and extensions of time to plead—remain in effect until modified by the federal court. Jenkins

v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co., 95 F.3d 791, 795 (9th Cir. 1996); see 28 U.S.C. § 1450 (all

“orders and other proceedings had in (state court) action prior to its removal shall remain in full force

and effect until dissolved or modified by the district court”).

Plaintiff attaches to the declaration of Jenna L. Motola (Doc. 40), a copy of documents which

were filed in the state court action and which were not included in the removal petition. Ms. Motola

states that attached as Exhibit A and Exhibit B to her declaration are “copies of all pleadings, process

and orders from the state court action from my office’s files that were not included in Defendant Legacy

Vulcan Corp.’s removal petition.” (Doc. 40, Motola Decl. ¶3.) Vulcan argues that it submitted all the

documents that were served on it in the state court action. Vulcan notes that the state court action had

been pending for two years before Vulcan was added as a defendant.

Case 1:08-cv-01050-LJO -SMS Document 52 Filed 10/08/08 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

There is no dispute that the documents attached to Ms. Motola’s declaration are contained in the

state court file and should be included in this Court’s file. Accordingly, the removal petition is amended

to include the documents/exhibits attached to the Declaration of Jenna Motola (Doc. 40).

Plaintiff argues that to ensure the Court has the complete state court file, the Court should order

that the removing party, Vulcan, file copies of all records and proceedings from the Stanislaus County

action.

28 U.S.C. §1447 provides in relevant part:

(a) In any case removed from a State court, the district court may issue all

necessary orders and process to bring before it all proper parties whether

served by process issued by the State court or otherwise.

(b) It may require the removing party to file with its clerk copies of all

records and proceedings in such State court or may cause the same to be

brought before it by writ of certiorari issued to such State court.

Plaintiff requests that the Court issue an order requiring Vulcan to file the entire state court file or a writ

of certiorari ordering Stanislaus County Court to produce all of the records from the state court action.

Plaintiff argues that, in this way, the relevant documents will be before the Court if the need in the future

arises.

Vulcan argues that it should not have to procure copies of the entire State court record and file

such in this Court. Vulcan argues that most of the documents were filed during the two years before

plaintiff named Vulcan as a new defendant in an amended complaint served upon Vulcan on June 5,

2008. Vulcan further argues that plaintiff should already possess a complete set of the state court

pleadings and the motion states plaintiff is now submitting all of those pleadings. Requiring Vulcan to

procure a second set of the same records from Stanislaus County Superior Court would be unduly

burdensome, duplicative and wasteful given that plaintiff’s motion ostensibly already attaches the entire

State court file.

Plaintiff submitted 1400 pages, according to Vulcan’s calculation, from the Superior Court file.

The Court has already found the removal petition should be so amended. In addition, Vulcan attaches

an additional 200 pages or so, which were also filed in the state court action and which are not part of

the 1400 documents attached to the Declaration of Ms. Motola. These additional 200 pages are attached

to the declaration of Sarah F. Peterman. Therefore, the removal petition is amended to include the

Case 1:08-cv-01050-LJO -SMS Document 52 Filed 10/08/08 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

documents/exhibits attached to the declaration of Sarah F. Peterman (Doc. 46). 

Based on the different documents submitted, the Court finds it may not have all the filed

documents from the state court action. Indeed, the Court recognizes that two years of litigation in an

environmental case with multiple parties will generate a vast number of filings. The Court

acknowledges the burden and cost on any one party, and the burden and cost on the Superior Court, in

requiring that all documents filed in this extensive litigation be re-filed in this Court. Therefore, the

Court will neither issue a writ nor require any party to obtain the remaining documents from the Superior

Court file. However, should any party need to use a document from the Superior Court file in

proceedings before the District Court, and the documents has not been amended to the removal petition,

that party is required to submit a certified copy of the state court-filed documents.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court ORDERS as follows:

1. The removal petition is amended to include the documents/exhibits attached to the

Declaration of Jenna Motola (Doc. 40).

2. The removal petition is amended to include the documents/exhibits attached to the

declaration of Sarah F. Peterman (Doc. 46).

3. The clerk of this Court is authorized to issue a summons for The Kirrberg Corporation.

4. The parties are required to submit a certified copy of state court-filed documents for any

future District Court proceeding if the document has not been amended to the removal

petition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 7, 2008 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-01050-LJO -SMS Document 52 Filed 10/08/08 Page 4 of 4