Crispin Luna v. Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. et al
| Crispin Luna |
| Bank of America, N.A., Bank of New York Mellon, Ditech Financial, LLC, Does, Quality Loan Service Corporation and Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. |
| 2:2016cv00843 |
| February 5, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Karen L. Stevenson |
| George H. Wu |
| Real Property: Foreclosure |
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
27
MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge George H. Wu: Proceedings: Court Order. On March 4, 2016, this Court issued an Order to Show Cause 17 to Defendant Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. that required it to provide citations to controlling pre cedent which would demonstrate that the approach which this Court has taken in the past is incorrect. Residential has provided a response, but it fails to cite to any such controlling precedent 25 . Consequently, for reasons stated in the OSC, this action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and remanded back to state court. Remanding case to Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case number BC 605986 (Made JS-6. Case Terminated). (mg)
|
|
Filing
17
(IN CHAMBERS): ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION by Judge George H. Wu: Residential has until 12:00 p.m. on Friday, March 11, to respond to this Order, in a brief of no more than 5 pages. Please refer to the Court's order for specifics. (cr)
|
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.
