Grundy et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 15

ORDER denying 11 Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 8/16/10.(LSP)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Elvin G. Grundy, Jr. and Willie Ruth Grundy, Plaintiffs, vs. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV10-1542 PHX DGC ORDER On June 25, 2010, Plaintiffs filed their initial complaint in Maricopa County Superior Court against Defendants JP Morgan Chase Bank, The Bear Stearns Company, EMC Mortgage Corporation, Aames Funding Corporation, John Vella, Cassieopeia Saicawalo, and Quality Loan Service Corporation. Doc. 1-1 at 13-46. On July 21, 2010 Defendant Chase Bank removed the case to this Court on the ground that it raised federal questions. Doc. 1. As of the date of removal, Chase Bank was the only Defendant that had been served. See Doc. 1-3 at 1-3. It appears that no Defendant has been served since the time of removal. On August 12, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction and for temporary restraining order. Doc. 11. In the motion, Plaintiffs request the Court to enjoin Defendant Quality Loan Service Corporation from conducting a trustee's sale of their home that is scheduled for August 23, 2010. Id. at 2. Plaintiffs did not request expedited consideration of their motion. Because Plaintiffs have not served any Defendants other than Chase Bank, no other Defendant has received proper notice of their motion for a temporary restraining order and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 preliminary injunction. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 does not allow a court to issue a preliminary injunction without notice to the adverse party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a). Rule 65 also does not allow a court to issue a temporary restraining order without notice to the adverse party unless the party seeking the order presents facts showing immediate injury and that efforts have been made to give notice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1). Plaintiffs have made no showing that they have given notice or made any efforts to give notice, and the facts suggest that they cannot. This case has been pending since June and has been pending before this Court since July, and yet Plaintiffs have not effected service on any Defendant other than Chase Bank. This is particularly problematic as to Quality Loan Service Corporation, as it is that Defendant's activities that Plaintiffs seek to enjoin. Plaintiffs have not shown that efforts have been made to give notice to Defendants, have not shown cause for their delay in serving Defendants, have not requested issuance of a temporary restraining order without notice, and, even if they have, have not shown cause for the Court to issue such an order without notice under Rule 65(b)(1). Defendants must receive notice of the complaint and motion. The Court will deny Plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs may re-file the motions with proper and timely notice to Defendants. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order (Doc. 11) is denied. DATED this 16th day of August, 2010. -2-

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?