Johnson-Gellineau v. Stiene & Associates, P.C. et al
| Nicole Johnson-Gellineau |
| Stiene & Associates, P.C., Christopher Virga, Esq., Ronni Ginsberg, Esq., JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association and Wells Fargo Bank National Association |
| 1:2016cv09945 |
| December 23, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Dutchess |
| Unassigned |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 |
| Plaintiff |
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
100
OPINION AND ORDER: In light of the foregoing analysis, the Court grants both the Bank Defendants' Motion To Dismiss and the Attorney Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Because this is the second adjudication of Plaintiff's claims on the merits, the dismissals are with prejudice. See Lastra v. Barnes & Noble Bookstore, No. 11-CV-2173, 2012 WL 12876, at *9 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2012) (stating that even prose plaintiffs are not entitled to file an amended complaint if the complaint "contains substantive problems such that an amended pleading would be futile"), aff'd, 523 F. App'x 32 (2d Cir. 2013). The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate the pending Motions, (Dkt. Nos. 75, 80), to mail a copy of this Opinion to Plaintiff, and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 6/27/2019) (jca) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
55
OPINION & ORDER re: 39 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Christopher Virga, Esq., Stiene & Associates, P.C., Ronni Ginsberg, Esq.; 34 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) filed by JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association, Wells Fargo Bank National Association. In light of the foregoing analysis, the Court grants the Bank Defendants' Motion To Dismiss and denies the Attorney Defendants' Motion to Dismiss without prejudic e to re-filing once the Second Circuit issues its opinion in Cohen v. Ditech Fin. LLC. Because this is the first adjudication of Plaintiffs claims on the merits, the dismissal of the claims against the Bank Defendants is without prejudice. If Plain tiff wishes to file an amended complaint, Plaintiff should file one within 30 days, and include within that amended complaint any changes to correct the deficiencies identified in this Opinion that Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. The amend ed complaint will replace, not supplement, the original complaint. The amended complaint must contain all of the claims and factual allegations Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. The Court will not consider factual allegations contained in su pplemental letters, declarations, affidavits, or memoranda. If Plaintiff fails to abide by the 30-day deadline, this Action may be dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate the pending Motions, (Dkt. No. 34, 39), and to mail a copy of this Opinion to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 3/29/2018) (anc)
|
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
- 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.
