Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_07-cv-08066/USCOURTS-azd-3_07-cv-08066-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

RICHARD VICARI, an individual d/b/a

COLOR ARTS LANDSCAPING; and

COLOR ARTS LANDSCAPING, a sole

proprietorship, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

WESTERN MUNICIPAL

CONSTRUCTION, INC., a Montana

corporation, 

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-07-8066-PCT-SMM

ORDER

Currently before the Court is the Notice of Suggestion of Non-Removability (Doc. 4)

filed by Defendant Western Municipal Corporation, apprising the Court that at the time the

Notice of Removal was filed, this Court did not have original jurisdiction over the suit. 

This lawsuit was originally filed in the Mohave County Superior Court on or about

May 8, 2007. At the time of filing, Plaintiff, an Arizona resident, sued Lake Havasu City, an

Arizona municipal corporation, and Western Municipal Corporation, a Montana corporation.

Thus, at the time, there was no diversity of citizenship, and this case was not removable.

According to this Notice of Suggestion, Western Municipal thereafter received a Notice of

Dismissal of Lake Havasu City from Plaintiff, and believing that Lake Havasu City had been

removed from the litigation, Western Municipal filed a Notice of Removal. Subsequently,

however, Western Municipal’s counsel received a Minute Entry from the Mohave County

Case 3:07-cv-08066-SMM Document 5 Filed 08/10/07 Page 1 of 2
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 -

Superior Court dated July 31, 2007, that alerted Western Municipal that on or about June 20,

2007, Lake Havasu City had filed a Motion to Dismiss, and the Mohave County Superior

Court has decided to treat the Motion to Dismiss as a Motion for Summary Judgment.

Moreover, the Superior Court has concluded that Lake Havasu City had appeared in the

litigation and that pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), ARCP, Plaintiff’s Notice of Dismissal was

ineffective absent the consent of Lake Havasu City. The Court then declined to accept the

dismissal of Lake Havasu City filed by Plaintiff, leaving Lake Havasu City as a party to the

litigation. Consequently, until such time that Mohave County Superior Court accepts the

dismissal of Lake Havasu City and diversity of citizenship exists, thereby conferring original

jurisdiction on this court, removal will not be proper.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to Mohave County

Superior Court.

DATED this 10th day of August, 2007.

Case 3:07-cv-08066-SMM Document 5 Filed 08/10/07 Page 2 of 2