Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06042/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06042-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MERCHANT E-SOLUTIONS INC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

COMMUNITY STATE BANK,

Defendant. /

No. C 07-06042 JSW

NOTICE OF QUESTIONS FOR

HEARING

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, PLEASE TAKE

NOTICE OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS FOR THE HEARING SCHEDULED ON

FEBRUARY 22, 2008, AT 9:00 A.M.:

The Court has reviewed the parties’ memoranda of points and authorities and, thus, does

not wish to hear the parties reargue matters addressed in those pleadings. If the parties intend to

rely on legal authorities not cited in their briefs, they are ORDERED to notify the Court and

opposing counsel of these authorities reasonably in advance of the hearing and to make copies

available at the hearing. If the parties submit such additional authorities, they are ORDERED

to submit the citations to the authorities only, with pin cites and without argument or additional

briefing. Cf. N.D. Civil Local Rule 7-3(d). The parties will be given the opportunity at oral

argument to explain their reliance on such authority.

1. Is Defendant arguing that, when the parties executed the Referral Agreement,

that act amounted to a written novation of the Direct Agreement. See, e.g., Wells

Fargo Bank v. Bank of America, 32 Cal. App. 4th 424, 431 (1995); Cal. Civ.

Code § 1530. 

Case 3:07-cv-06042-JSW Document 17 Filed 02/20/08 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

a. Does Plaintiff argue that, notwithstanding the language of the Referral

Agreement, a novation did not occur because of the parties’ course of

conduct? See, e.g., Fannuchi & Limi Farms v. United Agri Products,

Inc., 414 F.3d 1075, 1082 (9th Cir. 2005). Does Plaintiff have any

additional authority that by their conduct, parties to a contract can defeat

what purports to be a written novation?

b. If the Court can look beyond the text of the Direct Agreement to the

conduct of the parties to determine if they intended a novation, what is

Defendant’s best argument that the Court can resolve this matter on a

motion to dismiss?

c. If the Court grants Defendant’s motion in its entirety, but also granted

Plaintiff leave to amend, could Plaintiff assert facts supporting a claim

for breach of an implied contract? 

2. Are there any other issues the parties wish to address?

Dated: February 20, 2008 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-06042-JSW Document 17 Filed 02/20/08 Page 2 of 2