Caverly v. Fannie Mae a/k/a Federal National Mortgage Association et al

Filing 22

ORDER Adopting 21 Report and Recommendation and Denying Plaintiff's 14 Motion to Remand. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (Sian, M)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION LINDA CAVERLY, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 16-cv-10707 Honorable Thomas L. Ludington Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris FANNIE MAE, EVERBANK MORTGAGE COMPANY, and TROTT LAW, P.C., Defendants. __________________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND On January 21, 2016, Plaintiff Linda Caverly filed a complaint against Defendants Fannie Mae, Everbank Mortgage Company, and Trott Law in the Circuit Court for Cheboygan County. Not. of Removal, ECF No. 1. Defendant Fannie Mae removed the case on February 26, 2016 on the basis of diversity between the parties. Id. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris for management of all pre-trial matters. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on March 28, 2016. ECF No. 13. The amended complaint alleged eight counts against Defendants related to the foreclosure of Plaintiff’s home. That same day, Plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case to state court because there was not complete diversity of citizenship between the parties. Plaintiff cited the fact that Trott Law is a Michigan corporation, defeating diversity. On June 10, 2016, Judge Morris issued a report recommending that Plaintiff’s motion to remand be denied. See Rep. & Rec. 5–8, ECF No. 21. Judge Morris concluded that Plaintiff fraudulently joined Trott Law in order to defeat diversity. As a result, Judge Morris explained, exercise of this Court’s diversity jurisdiction is proper. Although the Magistrate Judge’s report explicitly stated that the parties to this action may object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report, neither Plaintiff nor Defendants filed any objections. The election not to file objections to the Magistrate Judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, ECF No. 21, is ADOPTED. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff Linda Caverly’s Motion to Remand, ECF No. 14, is DENIED. s/Thomas L. Ludington THOMAS L. LUDINGTON United States District Judge Dated: July 28, 2016 PROOF OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on July 28, 2016. s/Michael A. Sian MICHAEL A. SIAN, Case Manager -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?