Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00030/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00030-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Injunctive/Declaratory Relief

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

CORAL LOU SAHARA and M &

I/MARSHALL & ILSLEY TRUSTEE

COMPANY, as co-trustees of the

Ralph A. Greenwell and Adeline

S. Greenwell Family Trust

dated November 20, 1987,

NO. 2:06-cv-0030-MCE-GGH

Petitioners/Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER

RONALD S. GREENWELL, an

individual, and CARLA ROBBINS,

an individual,

Respondents/Defendants.

________________________________/

RONALD S. GREENWELL, individually

and as co-trustee of the Adeline

S. Greenwell Irrevocable Trust

dated March 8, 1994 and co-trustee

of Trust B of the Ralph A. Greenwell

Family Trust dated November 20, 1987;

CARLA ROBBINS LEWIS, individually 

and as co-trustee of the Adeline S.

Greenwell Irrevocable Trust dated

March 8, 1994 and co-trustee of

Trust B of the Ralph A. Greenwell

Family Trust dated November 20, 1987;

RANDEE BRADY, 

Case 2:06-cv-00030-MCE-GGH Document 25 Filed 03/28/06 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

individually and as co-trustee of 

the Adeline S. Greenwell

Irrevocable Trust dated March 8, 1994,

Cross-Claimants,

v.

CORAL LOU GLENN a.k.a CORAL LOU SAHARA

and M & I/MARSHALL & ILSLEY Trustee

Company, as co-trustees of Trust A 

and/or Trust B of the Ralph A. Greenwell

and Adeline S. Greenwell Family Trust

dated November 20, 1987 and CORAL LOU

SAHARA, as an individual,

Cross-Defendants. 

----oo0oo----

On March 14, 2006, counsel for Plaintiff Coral Lou Sahara

filed a Notice of Settlement in this matter. Thereafter, with

respect to the pending Motion to Remand, presently scheduled for

hearing on April 3, 2006, defense counsel filed a Supplemental

Opposition on March 20, 2006 pointing out certain issues posed by

the parties’ settlement.

Defense counsel has represented to the Court that all

parties want this Court to retain jurisdiction over the terms of

their settlement. Moreover, in the Stipulated Motion for

Conditional Dismissal submitted by both sides in the related case

(Greeenwell v. Greenwell, et al., Case No. 2:04-cv-2206-MCE-GGH),

both counsel make that representation directly. Consequently, it

would appear to the Court that Plaintiffs in this case desire

that the Motion to Remand be vacated.

///

///

Case 2:06-cv-00030-MCE-GGH Document 25 Filed 03/28/06 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

In order to give the parties additional time to fully

resolve this issue given the pending settlement, however, and to

finalize the terms of the settlement reached between them,

Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand is continued to June 5, 2006 at 9:00

a.m. The parties are further directed to provide, not later than

two weeks prior to June 5, 2006, a Joint Status Report addressing

the following issues: 1) the terms of any proposed conditional

dismissal, including the amount of time proposed for the Court to

retain jurisdiction, along with a draft order memorializing same;

and 2) a statement summarizing the extent to which the terms of

settlement have been satisfied, and what issues remain

outstanding. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 27, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00030-MCE-GGH Document 25 Filed 03/28/06 Page 3 of 3