Noble v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Filing
44
[DISREGARD SEE CLERK'S NOTICE [ 45 ]ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 2/8/2016 GRANTING Wells Fargo's Motion 43 Dropping Sham Defendants; Robert Landucci, Scott Harris and Marlene Hubbell are hereby DROPPED from this action pursuant to FRCP 21. (Reader, L) Modified on 2/8/2016 (Reader, L).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 Brooke Noble,
Plaintiff,
12
13
vs.
14 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and DOES 150, inclusive.,
15
Defendant.
16
Case No. 1:14-CV-01963-TLN-EPG
ASSIGNED FOR ALL PURPOSES TO
JUDGE TROY L. NUNLEY
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
DROP SHAM DEFENDANTS FROM
THIS ACTION PURSUANT TO
FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE 21
17
18
19
20
Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.'s ("Wells Fargo") Motion For An Order
21 Dropping Sham Defendants Robert Landucci, Scott Harris, And Marlene Hubbell
22 From This Action Pursuant To Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 21 came on
23 regularly for hearing before the Honorable Troy L. Nunley on March 24, 2016.
24
The Court, having read and considered the motion and all opposition and
25 reply papers, finds that the Sham Defendants are not properly joined because:
26
1. Plaintiff failed to obtain the requisite leave of court to add new parties;
27
2. Plaintiff belatedly attempts to add the Sham Defendants for the sole
28
purpose of destroying diversity jurisdiction; and
LAW OFFICES
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble
Mallory & Natsis LLP
ORDER
3. Plaintiff cannot possibly state a colorable claim against the Sham
1
Defendants.
2
3
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
4
1.
Wells Fargo's motion is GRANTED in all respects; and
5
2.
Sham defendants Robert Landucci, Scott Harris, and Marlene Hubbell are
6
hereby dropped from this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
7
Procedure 21.
8
9 Dated: February 8, 2016
10
11
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LAW OFFICES
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble
Mallory & Natsis LLP
ORDER
-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?