Blanton et al v. Bank of America, N.A. et al
| Christopher Blanton and Shartress Fisher-Blanton |
| Bank of America, N.A., ReconTrust Company, N.A. and America Homes 4 Rent Properties Two, LLC |
| 4:2013cv00513 |
| June 24, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Fort Worth Office |
| Tarrant |
| John McBryde |
| Real Property: Other |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act |
| None |
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
8
Memorandum Opinion and Order: To summarize, the court is convinced that there is no legitimate dispute in this action over ownership to the property, only plaintiffs' efforts to extend the time they,can stay on the property following the forec losure of their property. No information has been provided to the court that would enable the court to place a value on the interest plaintiffs seek to protect by this action. Thus, Removing Defendants have not shown by a preponderance of the eviden ce that the amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. Consequently, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the action, and it should be remanded to the state court from which it was removed. The court ORDERS that this action be, and is hereby, remanded to the state court from which it was removed. (Ordered by Judge John McBryde on 7/17/2013) (mdf)
|
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 Texas Northern 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.
