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)
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?