Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00683/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00683-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

ADM PROPERTIES, INC., NO. CIV. S-05-0683 FCD KJM

Plaintiff,

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

v.

RONALD A. QUINN, JR. and KELLY

A. QUINN,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

----oo0oo----

This matter is before the court on motion by defendants,

Ronald Quinn and Kelly Quinn (“defendants”), for reconsideration

of the court’s May 27, 2005 order granting plaintiff ADM

Properties, Inc.’s (“ADM”), motion to remand. In that order, the

court found that defendants’ notice of removal was untimely

because it was filed more than thirty days after March 3, 2005,

the date the bankruptcy court entered its order lifting the

automatic bankruptcy stay. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9027. Defendants

Case 2:05-cv-00683-FCD-KJM Document 13 Filed 06/23/05 Page 1 of 3
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

2

now move for reconsideration of that decision under Fed. R. Civ.

P. 60(b), arguing that the thirty-day window for filing the

notice of removal did not begin to run until March 13, 2005

because the bankruptcy court’s order was stayed for ten days

pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4001(a)(3). For the reasons stated

herein, defendants’ motion for reconsideration is GRANTED. The

court’s previous order is VACATED and the matter is REFERRED to

the Bankruptcy Court for this district.

STANDARD

Absent “highly unusual circumstances,” reconsideration of a

final judgment is appropriate only where (1) the court is

presented with newly-discovered evidence, (2) the court committed

“clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust,” or

(3) there is an intervening change in the controlling law. 

School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County, 5 F.3d at 1263. In order

for evidence to be considered “new” for the purposes of Rule

60(b), it must be of such a character that it would change the

outcome of the court’s prior decision. See Fernhoff v. Tahoe

Reg’l Planning Agency, 622 F. Supp. 121, 122 (D. Nev. 1985).

ANALYSIS

The court finds that defendants’ notice of removal should

have been filed, in the first instance, in the bankruptcy court

for this district. Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure

9027(a)(1) provides that the notice of removal shall be filed

with the clerk for the district and division within which is

located the state or federal court where the civil action is

pending. 

Under the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, “clerk” and

Case 2:05-cv-00683-FCD-KJM Document 13 Filed 06/23/05 Page 2 of 3
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

“clerk of the district court” is defined as the clerk of the

bankruptcy court, unless one has not been appointed. Fed. R.

Bankr. P. 9001(3) and 9002(3). 

Additionally, this court has longstanding rules referring to 

“bankruptcy judges of this district all cases under Title 11, and

all proceedings arising under Title 11 or arising in or related

to cases under Title 11.” E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Gen. Order No.

182 Part 1.01 (emphasis added).

Pursuant to the aforementioned rules, defendants’

notice of removal should have been filed with the clerk of the

Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District. As a result, that

court should have considered in the first instance plaintiffs’

motion to remand. Accordingly, this court GRANTS defendants’

motion for reconsideration; VACATES the prior Memorandum & Order

No. S-05-0683, and REFERS this case to the Bankruptcy Court for

further proceedings and decision. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 22, 2005

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL, Jr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-00683-FCD-KJM Document 13 Filed 06/23/05 Page 3 of 3