Jon W. Warwick et al v. Bank of New York Mellon
| Jeannette Warwick and Jon W. Warwick |
| Bank of America, N.A., Bank of New York Mellon, CTC Real Estate Services, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., Does, Green Tree Servicing, LLC and Recontrust Company, N. A. |
| 2:2015cv03343 |
| May 4, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Suzanne H. Segal |
| Real Property: Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
94
JUDGMENT by Magistrate Judge Suzanne H. Segal, Related to: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS, CONSTRUED AS A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, FILED BY DEFENDANTS GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC AND BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON (Dkt. No. 45 ); ( 2) GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS, CONSTRUED AS A MOTION FOR SUM MARY JUDGMENT, FILED BY DEFENDANT BANK OF AMERICA (Dkt. No. 48 ); AND (3) DENYING PLAINTIFFS' APPLICATION FOR EX PARTE HEARING ON TILA RESCISSION CLAIM (Dkt. No. 89 ), 93 . IT IS H EREBY ADJUDGED that Judgment is entered against Plaintiffs Jon W. Warwick and Jeannette Warwick and in favor of Defendants Bank of America, N.A., Bank of New York Mellon, and Green Tree Servicing, LLC, on all claims alleged in this action. IT IS FURTHER ADJUDGED that the above-captioned action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (mr)
|
|
Filing
35
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER:(1) DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO REMAND (Dkt. No. 19 ); (2) GRANTING IN PART BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Dkt. No. 10 ); (3) GRANTING IN PART GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Dkt. No. 7 ); AND (4) DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by Magistrate Judge Suzanne H. Segal. Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand is DENIED. BANA's Motion to Dismiss and Green Tree's Motion to Dismiss are each GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Th e Court concludes that the FAC, as amended by the substitution of BANA and Green Tree for Doe Defendants Nos. 1 and 2, fails to put these two Defendants on notice of the claims against them. Accordingly, the FAC is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. If Plaintiffs wish to pursue their claims, they shall file a Second Amended Complaint within fourteen days after the date of the settlement conference ordered by the Court as discussed at the hearing. (See document for further details). (mr)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
