DeShaw et al v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. et al
Dennis Duane DeShaw and Susan Kay Broer-DeShaw |
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., First Magnus Financial Corporation, Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, Citibank, N.A., Bank of America, N.A., Jane Does 1-10, John Does 1-10, Doe Corporations 1-10, Doe Partnerships 1-10, Doe Entities 1-10, Doe Governmental Units 1-10 and The Bank Of New York Mellon |
1:2015cv00118 |
April 7, 2015 |
US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
Hawaii Office |
Honolulu |
UNASSIGNED |
BARRY M. KURREN |
All Other Real Property |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 47 ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION re 46 - Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY on 3/21/2016. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Dennis Duane DeShaw and Susan Kay Broer-DeShaw shall be served by first class mail at the address of record on March 21, 2016. |
Filing 26 ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT re 11 , 14 , 20 , 21 , 24 , 25 - Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY on 9/22/2015. "For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby DENIES AS MOOT Defendants Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, The Bank Of New York Mellon, and Bank of America, N.A.'s Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. No. 11 .) The Court also DENIES Defendants Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, The Bank Of New York Mellon, and Bank of America, N.A.'s Motion to Strike Plaintiffs' response to Defendant Citibank's Motion to Dismiss and for Certification of Judgment Against Plaintiff's Compla int Under Rule 54(b), (Doc. No. 21 ,) and Defendant Citibank's Motion for Joinder as to that motion. (Doc. No. 24 .) The Court GRANTS Defendant Citi's substantive joinder to the Dismissed Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. No. 14 .) Count I of the Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and Count II of the Complaint, Plaintiffs' quiet title claim, is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs must file any amended complaint within thirty days of the entry of this Order. Any amended complaint must correct all the deficiencies noted in this Order or Plaintiffs' claims will be dismissed with prejudice." (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipa nts registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry |
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 Hawaii 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.