Massey v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC et al.
| James Harrison Massey |
| Computershare US, Bank of America, Computershare Loan Services, Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, Computershare Limited, Computershare Mortgage Services Inc., Computershare US, Inc, Computershare Inc. and Computersare US Services Inc. |
| 1:2021cv00601 |
| March 1, 2021 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| S Kato Crews |
| William J Martinez |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 8, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 31
MOTION to Set Aside 29 Clerk's Entry of Default by Defendant Computershare Loan Services. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Email Correspondence Apr. 28, 2021)(VanVactor, Zachary)
|
|
Filing 30
RESPONSE to #27 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Motion for Entry of Default Judgment) filed by Defendant Computershare Loan Services. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Colo. Secretary of State Filing)(VanVactor, Zachary)
|
|
Filing 29
Clerk's ENTRY OF DEFAULT as to Computershare Loan Services re #26 MOTION for Entry of Default as to, by Clerk. Text Only Entry (angar, )
|
|
Filing 28
ADMINISTRATIVE NOTICE: The summons submitted has incorrect caption and is not issued. (cpomm, )
|
|
Filing 27
MOTION for Entry of Default Judgment, by Plaintiff James Harrison Massey. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit in Support of Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, #2 Proposed Order (PDF Only), #3 Certificate of Servicce)(angar, )
|
|
Filing 26
MOTION for Entry of Default as to Computershare Loan Services, by Plaintiff James Harrison Massey. (angar, ) #1 Affidavit in Support of MOtion for Entry of Default), #2 Proposed Document) (angar, ).
|
|
Filing 25
ORDER striking Plaintiff's Response and Opposition to Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC's Motion for Show Cause Order, and To Stay Proceedings Pending Resolution of Same #23 . Plaintiff's Response is STRICKEN for failure to comply with this Court's Revised Practice Standard III.C.1. This Court's Revised Practice Standard III.C.1 states that the page limits for "ALL OTHER motions... Motion and Response [shall be]: 15 pages; Reply: 10 pages". Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file an Amended Response which complies in all respects with this Court's Revised Practice Standards on or before April 26, 2021. Defendants Reply to the Amended Response will be due May 17, 2021. SO ORDERED by Judge William J. Martinez on 4/19/2021. Text Only Entry (wjmlc1, )
|
|
Filing 23
RESPONSE to #14 MOTION for Order to Show Cause and to Stay Proceedings Pending Resolution of Same, filed by Plaintiff James Harrison Massey. (angar, )
|
|
Filing 22
JOINDER re #14 MOTION for Order to Show Cause and to Stay Proceedings Pending Resolution of Same by Defendant Bank of America. (Adams, Anna)
|
|
Filing 24
MOTION to Strike Notice of Related Case, by Plaintiff James Harrison Massey. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order (PDF Only), #2 Exhibit)(angar, )
|
|
Filing 21
CERTIFICATE of Service by Mail by Clerk of Court re 20 Order,, 19 Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge, sent to James Harrison Massey 440 Claypool Boyce Road Alvaton, KY 42122 - Text Only Entry (angar, )
|
|
Filing 20
ORDER: Counsel for the parties and all counsel who may later enter an appearance shall review and familiarize themselves with the undersigned's Revised Practice Standards (as most recently revised effective December 1, 2020 and as they may be amended from time to time), which may be downloaded #here. SO ORDERED by Judge William J. Martinez on 4/ 12/2021. Text Only Entry (wjmsec, )
|
|
Filing 19
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews. Magistrate Judge Crews, or such other Magistrate Judge who may in the future be reassigned to this case, is designated to conduct ALLMTN proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a) and (b). Court sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. On the recommendation or informal request of the Magistrate Judge or on the request of the parties by motion, the court may direct the parties to engage in an early neutral evaluation, a settlement conference, or another alternative dispute resolution proceeding. SO ORDERED by Judge William J. Martinez on 4/12/2021. Text Only Entry (wjmsec, )
|
|
Filing 18
AMENDED COMPLAINT against Bank of America, Computershare Limited, Computershare Loan Services, Computershare US, Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, Computershare Mortgage Services Inc., Computershare Inc., Computershare U.S. Services, filed by James Harrison Massey. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E) to re-file pursuant to #17 Order (angar, )
|
|
Filing 17
ORDER. Given the filing of Plaintiffs Motion/Notice of Filing an Amended Complaint (ECF No. #7 ), the Courts Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 4 ) is DISCHARGED. Defendant SLS's Motion for Show Cause Order and to Stay Proceedings Pending Resolution of Same (ECF No. #14 ) is GRANTED IN PART. That portion of Defendant SLS's Motion which seeks that the proceedings in this matter be stayed is GRANTED. The proceedings in this matter are STAYED pending the Court's ruling on Defendant SLS's Motion for a Show Cause Order. Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file a response to Defendant SLS's Motion for ShowCause Order (ECF No. #14 ) on or before May 3, 2021. Defendant SLS is DIRECTED to file a reply in support of its Motion for Show Cause Order (ECF NO. #14 ) on or before May 10, 2021. ORDERED by Judge William J. Martinez on 4/12/2021. (angar, )
|
|
Filing 16
Notice of Affidavit of the Service for the Defendant, Bank of America, by Plaintiff James Harrison Massey. (angar, )
|
|
Filing 15
STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Answer or Respond to the Complaint by Defendant Bank of America. Bank of America answer due 4/23/2021. (Adams, Anna)
|
|
Filing 14
MOTION for Order to Show Cause and to Stay Proceedings Pending Resolution of Same by Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(VanVactor, Zachary)
|
|
Filing 13
NOTICE OF CASE ASSOCIATION PURSUANT TO D.C.COLO.LCivR 3.2 by Zachary Myers VanVactor on behalf of Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Docket Sheet, Massey v. Specialized Loan Servicing LLC, No. 1:20-cv-88 (W.D. Ky.), #2 Exhibit 2 - Complaint, #3 Exhibit 3 - Memorandum Opinion & Order and Final Judgment)(VanVactor, Zachary)
|
|
Filing 12
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT identifying Corporate Parent Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Corporate Parent Computershare Mortgage Services Inc. for Computershare Loan Services. (VanVactor, Zachary)
|
|
Filing 11
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT identifying Corporate Parent Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Corporate Parent Computershare Mortgage Services Inc. for Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC. (VanVactor, Zachary)
|
|
Filing 10
NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Ameena Raheel Khan on behalf of Computershare Loan Services, Specialized Loan Servicing, LLCAttorney Ameena Raheel Khan added to party Computershare Loan Services(pty:dft), Attorney Ameena Raheel Khan added to party Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC(pty:dft) (Khan, Ameena)
|
|
Filing 9
NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Zachary Myers VanVactor on behalf of Computershare Loan Services, Specialized Loan Servicing, LLCAttorney Zachary Myers VanVactor added to party Computershare Loan Services(pty:dft), Attorney Zachary Myers VanVactor added to party Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC(pty:dft) (VanVactor, Zachary)
|
|
Filing 8
SUMMONS Returned Executed by James Harrison Massey. Computershare Limited, Computershare Loan Services and Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC served on 3/12/2021, answer due 4/2/2021. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(angar, )
|
|
Filing 7
MOTION to File Amended Complaint, by Plaintiff James Harrison Massey. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Document)(angar, )
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER. Before the Court is Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction ("Motion") #5 . On March 2, 2021, the Court entered an Order to Show Cause directing Plaintiff to demonstrate by March 19, 2021 why the Court should not dismiss this action based on Plaintiff's failure to sufficiently allege diversity jurisdiction 4 . Plaintiff has not yet responded to the Order to Show Cause. Accordingly, the Motion is DENIED without prejudice because Plaintiff has yet to satisfy his burden of establishing that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction. SO ORDERED by Judge William J. Martinez on 3/5/2021. Text Only Entry(wjmlc1, )
|
|
Filing 5
Plaintiff's Emergency MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order, by Plaintiff James Harrison Massey. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Certificate of Service)(angar, )
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE returnable March 19, 2021. The Court has a duty to sua sponte consider its subject matter jurisdiction. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). Plaintiff's Complaint alleges that the Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332 based on the diversity of the parties. Defendants Computershare Loan Services, LLC, and Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, are identified as limited liability companies. The Court must consider the citizenship of all members of the LLCs in determining whether diversity jurisdiction exists. See Siloam Springs Hotel, L.L.C. v. Century Sur. Co., 781 F.3d 1233, 1237 (10th Cir. 2015) ("only those state-created entities that are corporations, in the traditional understanding of that word, will be treated as a person for purposes of diversity jurisdiction"). As Plaintiff is invoking jurisdiction of the federal court, he bears the burden of establishing that jurisdiction is proper. See Merida Delgado v. Gonzales, 428 F.3d 916, 919 (10th Cir. 2005). As filed, Plaintiff's Complaint is deficient in that, apart from an unsubstantiated bald assertion to that effect, it fails to establish the citizenship of every member of Defendants Computershare Loan Services, LLC, and Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC. Further, to establish subject matter jurisdiction under 1332, the party invoking federal jurisdiction must show the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. See Radil v. Sanborn W. Camps, Inc., 384 F.3d 1220, 1225 (10th Cir. 2004), and the Court "must rigorously enforce Congress' intent to restrict federal jurisdiction in controversies between citizens of different states." Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp., 251 F.3d 1284, 1289 (10th Cir. 2001) abrogated on other grounds by Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, 135 S. Ct. 547 (2014)). Here, Plaintiff's Complaint lacks any factual allegations that plausibly support its wholly conclusory claim that more than $75,000 is in dispute. Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, by March 19, 2021, as to why the Court should not on its own motion dismiss this action based on Plaintiff's failure to allege facts sufficient to show that the Court has diversity jurisdiction over this matter. SO ORDERED by Judge William J. Martinez on 3/2/2021. Text Only Entry (wjmsec, )
|
|
Filing 3
SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (cpomm, )
|
|
Filing 2
Case assigned to Judge William J. Martinez and drawn to Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews. Text Only Entry (cpomm, )
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT in a Civil Action against Bank of America, Computershare Limited, Computershare Loan Services, Computershare US, Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC Filing Fee: $402 Receipt Number:COX098233, filed by James Harrison Massey. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 Envelope)(cpomm, )
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Colorado 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.
