Montz v. Nevada Business Corporations, Inc. ( 2024 )

1 CA Bar No. 337390 Damon L. Booth, Esq. 2 CA Bar No. 326494 HIGH WEST LAW, PC 3 11025 Pioneer Trail, Suite 101A Truckee, CA 96161 4 Telephone: (530) 414-9388 dbooth@highwestlaw.com 5 gwiltshire@highwestlaw.com 6 Attorneys for Defendants 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA—SACRAMENTO DIVISION 9 10 RICHARD AND LAVERNA MONTZ, Case No.: 2:22-cv-00814-JDP individuals, 11 STIPULATION TO RETAIN JURISDICTION UNDER CALIFORNIA Plaintiffs, 12 C ANO DD E [P O RF O C POIV SI EL D P ] R OO RC DE ED RU RE § 664.6 13 v. 14 NEVADA BUSINESS CORPORATIONS, INC., a Nevada corporation, ARISTOCRAT 15 VENTURES, a Nevada corporation, PROBACK SYSTEMS, INC., a Nevada 16 corporation, WAYNE WAKEFIELD, an 17 individual, and DOES 1–25, inclusive, 18 Defendants. 19 20 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BETWEEN Plaintiffs RICHARD and LAVERNA 21 MONTZ (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and Defendants NEVADA BUSINESS CORPORATIONS, 22 INC., ARISTOCRAT VENTURES, PROBACK SYSTEMS, INC., and WAYNE WAKEFIELD 23 (collectively, “Defendants”) (Plaintiffs and Defendants are collectively referred to herein as the 24 “parties”) as follows: 25 1. Plaintiffs filed this action against Defendants on January 26, 2022, in the Superior 26 Court of California, County of Placer, for among other causes of actions, fraudulent 27 transfer and breach of fiduciary duties. 28 1 2. On March 24, 2022, Defendants removed this case from the Superior Court of 2 California, County of Placer, to the United States District Court for the District of 3 Nevada on the basis of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). 4 3. On May 16, 2022, the court transferred this case from the United State District Court 5 for District of Nevada to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 6 California, pursuant to stipulation by the parties. 7 4. Plaintiffs and Defendants entered into a settlement agreement dated 8 January 19, 2024__ to resolve this action (the “Settlement Agreement”). 9 5. California Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6 expressly provides that, “[i]f parties to 10 pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of 11 the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, 12 upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested 13 by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement 14 until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.” 15 6. Pursuant to the court’s analysis in Renaissance Ribbons, Inc. v. Hadley Pollet, LLC, 16 No. 2:07-CV-1271-JAM-DAD, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102942, at 2 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 17 2008) “California Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6 applies in this Court” for following 18 reasons: 19 a. No Federal Rule of Civil Procedure directly conflicts with Cal. Code Civ. Proc. 20 § 664.6; 21 b. “Where a federal court is exercising jurisdiction solely because of the diversity 22 of citizenship of the parties, the outcome of the litigation in the federal court 23 should be substantially the same, so far as legal rules determine the outcome of 24 a litigation, as it would be tried in a State court.” Gasperini v. Ctr. for 25 Humanities, 518 U.S. 415, 427 (1996). “Accordingly, to ensure that the 26 outcome of the litigation would be the same as if it has been brought in state 27 court, Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 664.6 should apply.” Renaissance Ribbons, Inc., 28 2008 U.S. LEXIS 102942 at 4; and 1 c. There is no “strong federal interest in preventing the enforcement of settlement 2 agreements.” Id. at 5. 3 7. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs and Defendants agree that: 4 a. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Settlement 5 Agreement until performance in full of its terms, including, if necessary, 6 enforcement and entry of the stipulated judgment attached thereto as Exhibit C 7 (the “Stipulated Judgment”) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure 8 § 664.6; and 9 b. Plaintiffs shall file a stipulation of dismissal without prejudice pursuant to 10 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) immediately upon the Court’s 11 approval of this Stipulation. 12 It is understood that Defendants expressly waive notice of entry of this Stipulation and also 13 expressly waive any right to appeal or seek review of this Stipulation by a higher court. 14 It is further understood that the parties to this Stipulation have agreed that the Court shall 15 retain jurisdiction pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6 over the enforcement of 16 their Settlement Agreement until performance in full of its terms, including, if necessary, 17 enforcement of the Stipulated Judgment attached thereto as Exhibit C. This includes the tolling of 18 any applicable statute, rule, or court order affecting timely prosecution of this action. 19 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 Dated: January ____, 2024 NEW POINT LAW GROUP, LLP 2 3 By: ____________________________________ Daniel Griffin, Esq. 4 Attorney for Plaintiffs RICHARD and LAVERNA MONTZ 5 6 Dated: January ____, 2024 HIGH WEST LAW, PC 7 8 9 By: ____________________________________ Grant Wiltshire, Esq. 10 Attorney for Defendants NEVADA BUSINESS CORPORATIONS, 11 INC.; ARISTOCRAT VENTURES; PROBACK SYSTEMS, INC.; and WAYNE 12 WAKEFIELD 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 PROPOSED} ORDER 2 The Court, having read and considered the Stipulation filed by the parties, and good cause 3 || appearing: 4 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6, this Court shall retain 6 || jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement until performance in full of its terms, 7 | including, if necessary, enforcement and entry of the Stipulated Judgment attached thereto as g | Exhibit C. 9 2. Plaintiffs shall file a stipulation of dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Federal 10 | Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i1) tramediatehaper within seven days of the Court’s 11 | approval of this Stipulation. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. i Dated: _ February 6, 2024 sa 15 awe D. PE i ERSON 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. FOR CRT. TO RETAIN JURISDICTION AND