Rudy Ramirez et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge George H. Wu remanding case to Riverside County Superior Court, Case number RIC1903787. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (See document for details) (mrgo)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Rudy Ramirez, et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al.
Present: The Honorable
October 7, 2019
GEORGE H. WU, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Court Reporter / Recorder
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:
Attorneys Present for Defendants:
IN CHAMBERS - ORDER
Plaintiffs Rudy and Sandra Ramirez as pro pers filed the present lawsuit in the California Superior
Court, County of Riverside against Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, Wachovia Mortgage, World Savings
Bank and Barrett Daffin Frappier Treder & Weiss, LLP (“Barrett”) alleging causes of action for: 1) violation
of Cal. Civ. Code § 2923.5; 2) violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 2923.6; 3) Quiet Title; 4) Cancellation of
Instrument; and 5) violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200. See Docket No. 1-1. Barrett is named as
a defendant in the third and fourth causes of action. Id. Plaintiffs allege that Barrett “acting at the behest
of Defendant Wells Fargo, recorded a Notice of Trustee Sale” and that “Plaintiffs are seeking for the sale
date to be cancelled and to be taken in consideration for an approval of a loan modification.” Id. at ¶¶ 18,
20. While recognizing that certain members of Barrett were California citizens, Wells Fargo nevertheless
removed the matter to federal court on the basis of diversity contending that Barrett could be ignored
because it was a fraudulently joined defendant. See Docket No. 1 at 5-7.
Wells Fargo filed a motion to dismiss. See Docket No. 7. This Court considered that motion, but
initially found that there was an issue as to subject matter jurisdiction because it appeared that Barrett was
not a fraudulently joined defendant. See 9/30/2019 Tentative Ruling, Docket No. 15. The issues were argued
at the hearing on the motion and the matter was taken under submission. Id.
After considering the arguments of counsel, the Court adopts its tentative ruling as its final
decision on the issue of alleged fraudulent joinder finding that Barrett has not been fraudulently joined and,
hence, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action. Therefore, the case is ordered remanded
back to state court forthwith.
Initials of Preparer
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 1 of 1
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?