Sharp v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC et al

Filing 46

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh denying 43 Ex Parte Application (lhklc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/26/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

TODD SHARP, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

13
14

Case No.: 14-cCV00831-LHK
ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY
STAY

v.

15

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, et al.,

16

Defendants.

17
18

On January 22, 2015, Plaintiffs filed an ex parte application for a temporary stay

19

(“Application”) while the Court considers Plaintiffs’ to-be-filed motion for stay pending appeal to

20

the Ninth Circuit of the Court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 37). ECF

21

No. 43. Defendants opposed the motion on January 23, 2015, ECF No. 44, and Plaintiffs replied

22

that same day, ECF No. 45.

23

The Court hereby DENIES Plaintiffs’ Application. On January 15, 2015, one week after

24

the Court entered judgment in favor of Defendants, ECF No. 38, the Monterey County Superior

25

Court reissued a writ of possession to defendant Nationstar for the property located at 25011

26

Hidden Mesa Court, Monterey, California 93940. ECF No. 43-1 Ex. A. The Rooker-Feldman

27
28

1
Case No.: 14-CV-00831-LHK
ORDER DENYING EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY STAY

1

doctrine bars this Court from staying that state court writ of possession. See, e.g., Dang v.

2

Oakland Police Dep’t, No. C 13-4155 PJH, 2014 WL 793613, at *7 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2014)

3

(“[A]ny challenge to the writ of possession issued by the Alameda County Superior Court

4

following the judgment in the unlawful detainer action is barred by the Rooker-Feldman

5

doctrine.”). “Under that doctrine, federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the propriety of state

6

court rulings, including the issuance of a judgment and writ of possession in connection with a

7

state court unlawful detainer proceeding.” Id. Accordingly, the Court denies Plaintiffs’

8

Application. See Duenas v. Freitas, No. C 13-0836 SBA, 2013 WL 3298249, at *4 (N.D. Cal.

9

June 28, 2013) (holding that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred a federal court challenge to the
writ of possession issued in a state court unlawful detainer action). Any relief Plaintiffs may

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

desire from the writ of possession must be sought in the California state courts.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14
15
16

Dated: January 26, 2015
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Case No.: 14-CV-00831-LHK
ORDER DENYING EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY STAY