Order Granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding and for Abstention Under 28 U.S.C. § 1334. Debtor-Plaintiff sought damages against Defendant for breach of the implied warranty of habitability and fraudulent or deceptive trade practices. Defendant filed a motion to  dismiss, contending that abstention was mandatory under 28 U.S.C.  § 1334(c)(2) or alternatively, the Court should permissively abstain under 28 U.S.C.  § 1334(c)(1).  The Court found that Defendant’s motion was timely; that the adversary proceeding was on upon state law claims; that the case was merely “related to” a bankruptcy case, rather than arising in or under Title 11; that there would be no independent grounds for federal jurisdiction over these claims; that the state court action based on the claims was pending when the bankruptcy case was filed; and that the claims could be timely adjudicated in state court. Therefore, abstention was mandatory. The Court further found that, even if abstention were not necessary, it would permissively abstain in the interests of justice and comity.