Nath v. Select Portfolio Servicing et al
||Select Portfolio Servicing, U.S. Bank N.A. and Locke Lord LLP
||October 16, 2015
||US District Court for the Southern District of New York
||White Plains Office
||Kenneth M. Karas
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 1345
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|February 28, 2017
OPINION & ORDER. re: 13 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, filed by Select Portfolio Servicing, Locke Lord LLP, U.S. Bank N.A. The Court grants Defendants' Motion To Dismiss in its entirety. Because Plai ntiff-an undeniably experienced litigant-has already amended his Complaint in the instant Action, but has still failed to state a claim, the Amended Complaint is dismissed with prejudice. See Denny v. Barber, 576 F.2d 465, 471 (2d Cir. 1978) (holdi ng that the plaintiff was not entitled to a third go-around). Courts are reluctant to grant further leave to amend where [the] [p]laintiff has already had two bites at the apple, and they have proven fruitless. Melvin v. County of Westchester, No. 14-CV-2995, 2016 WL 1254394, at *24 n.19 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2016) (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted)). Over the course of Plaintiff's 15 years of litigating his interest in the Subject Property, he has had an orchard's w orth of apples. And as the Court is still adjudicating three open cases in Plaintiff's fruit basket of lawsuits, he will again have his day in Court. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate the pending Motion, (Dkt. No. 13), and close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 2/28/17) (yv)
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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.
Why Is My Information Online?