Plumb v. Citizens Bank, Incorporated et al

Filing 19

ORDER of Partial Dismissal of 1 Complaint, filed by Amy Plumb. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION AMY L. PLUMB, Plaintiff, Case No. 13-10529 v. Hon. John Corbett O’Meara CITIZENS BANK, INC.; CITIZENS BANK, MORTGAGE CORPORATION; CHASE MORTGAGE COMPANY; CITIZENS BANK MORTGAGE COMPANY, L.L.C; CITIMORTGAGE, INC.; THE FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION; and ORLANS & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Defendants. ________________________________/ ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL Plaintiff Amy L. Plumb filed a four-count complaint in this matter alleging the following causes of action: Count I, violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15. U.S.C. § 1692; Count II, fraudulent/illegal/improper foreclosure and sheriff’s sale under Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.3204; Count III, fraudulent transfer of second mortgage and note as to Defendants Citizens Bank, Inc., Citizens Bank Mortgage Company, L.L.C., and The Federal National Mortgage Association; and Count IV, fraud in the inducement of mortgage payments under Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.3205. Although Plaintiff’s cause of action arising under a federal statue is cognizable in this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, the remaining allegations present claims based solely on state law. This court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims in order to avoid jury confusion. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c); United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715 (1966); and Padilla v. City of Saginaw, 867 F. Supp. 1309 (E.D. Mich. 1994). Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that Counts II, III, and IV are DISMISSED. Date: April 19, 2013 s/John Corbett O’Meara United States District Judge I hereby certify that on April 19, 2013 a copy of this order was served upon counsel of record using the ECF system. s/William Barkholz 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?