Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-02257/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-02257-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Adelphia Cable Communications
Defendant
Adelphia Communications Corporation
Defendant
Century Mendocino Cable TV
Defendant
Pauley Construction, Inc.
Cross-defendant

Document Text:

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

SIFA TUIAKI and LUPE TUIAKI,

Plaintiffs,

v.

PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY,

PAULEY CONSTRUCTION, INC., TRAFFIC

SOLUTIONS, INC., ADELPHIA

TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO., INC., SBC

TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., MOBILE TOOL

INTERNATIONAL, INC., dba TELSTA,

COUNTY OF MENDOCINO, STATE OF

CALIFORNIA, PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE

COMPANY, PACIFIC TELESIS GROUP, SBC

OPERATIONS, INC., and DOES 1 to 50,

Defendants.

ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION

aka CENTURY MENDOCINO CABLE TV dba

ADELPHIA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS,

Cross-claimant,

v.

PAULEY CONSTRUCTION, INC.,

Cross-defendant.

 /

No. C 07-2257 CW

ORDER GRANTING

PAULEY

CONSTRUCTION,

INC.'S MOTION TO

REMAND TO STATE

COURT 

Case 4:07-cv-02257-CW Document 35 Filed 07/02/07 Page 1 of 3
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

Cross-defendant Pauley Construction has filed a motion to

remand this action to state court. Cross-claimant Adelphia

Communications Corporation (Adelphia) opposes this motion. The

matter was heard on June 28, 2007. Having considered all of the

papers filed by the parties and oral argument on the motion, the

Court GRANTS Pauley's motion to remand. 

As the Court noted at the hearing, this proceeding, Adelphia's

cross-claim for indemnity against Pauley Construction, is not a

core proceeding under the Bankruptcy Code, but is merely related to

Adelphia's bankruptcy case. Thus, this Court has non-exclusive

jurisdiction over it. 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b). Contrary to Adelphia's

contention, the outcome of this indemnity action is a separate

matter from Adelphia's payment to Pauley in the bankruptcy case. 

The state court is well suited to hear Adelphia's indemnity crossclaim, as it involves state law issues of negligence and contract

law. Furthermore, Adelphia could have originally brought this

claim in federal court but chose to sue Pauley in state court. 

Finally, under either 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) or Federal Rule of

Bankruptcy Procedure 9027(a)(3), Adelphia's notice of removal was

untimely.

For the foregoing reasons, Pauley's motion to remand to state

court is GRANTED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 7/2/07 

CLAUDIA WILKEN

United States District Judge

Case 4:07-cv-02257-CW Document 35 Filed 07/02/07 Page 2 of 3
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 3

Case 4:07-cv-02257-CW Document 35 Filed 07/02/07 Page 3 of 3