Horton v. Wells Fargo Mortgage, N.A. et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 28 Report and Recommendation (Written Opinion). Defendants' Amended Motion to Dismiss 12 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. All claims other than Count 4/Count I are DISMISSED WITHOUT PRE JUDICE. Count 4/Count I is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE with respect to Selene for lack of service. Count 4/Count I is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE with respect to Wells Fargo for failure to state a claim. Defendants' Amended Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 15 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Michael J. Davis on 2/23/17. (KMW)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Fredrick Horton, III,
Civil No. 16-cv-2267 (MJD/TNL)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; Selene Finance LP;
U.S. Bank N.A., as Trustee for Stanwich Mortgage
Loan Trust, Series 2012-3; and Wilford, Geske &
Fredrick Horton, III, 1 Thomas Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55405 (pro se Plaintiff);
David R. Mortensen, Wilford, Geske & Cook, PA, 7616 Currell Boulevard, Suite 200,
Woodbury, MN 55125 (for Defendants).
Based upon the Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Tony N.
Leung dated January 23, 2017 (ECF No. 28), along with all the files and records, and no
objections to said Recommendation having been filed, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants’ Amended Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED IN PART
and DENIED IN PART.
2. All claims other than Count 4/Count I are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
3. Count 4/Count I is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE with respect to Selene
for lack of service.
4. Count 4/Count I is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE with respect to Wells Fargo
for failure to state a claim.
5. Defendants’ Amended Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Defendants’ Motion
to Dismiss (ECF No. 15) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Date: February 23, 2017
s/Michael J. Davis
Michael J. Davis
United States District Court Judge
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?