Menendez v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion to Amend, [Doc. No.53], is denied. 53 Signed by District Judge Henry E. Autrey on 11/22/13. (CLA)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
JOHN R. MENENDEZ,
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NA
SAFEGUARD PROPERTIES LLC
WELLS FARGO BANK NA,
Case No. 4:12CV1073 HEA
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Amendment of
Order Granting Leave to Join and Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction to Include
Remand. . .to Missouri Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis. [Doc. No. 54].
Defendants oppose the motion. For the reasons stated below, the Motion is
Plaintiff sought to add party defendants, however, Plaintiff essentially asked
the Court to dismiss this action based on his argument that additional parties were
needed, and therefore, under Rule 19 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
dismissal was necessary to fully adjudicate the merits. The Court granted the
motion over Defendants’ objections, finding that joinder was required. Notably,
Plaintiff has never submitted a proposed Amended Complaint joining the new
defendants. Moreover, Plaintiff’s argument is based solely on the convenience
factor for Plaintiff that he will not have to re-file the case and will only have to
serve the new defendants. The Court is unaware of the identity of the new
defendants, and legally, were the Court to amend the Order, it could not remand
the case because the non-diverse defendants have not been joined. Plaintiff still
does not seek leave to file an Amended Complaint adding the non-diverse
The Court has exercised its equitable power and dismissed this action
pursuant to rule 19(b). Plaintiff’s motion seeking amendment and remand fail to
fall within the purview of this exercise.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend, [Doc. No.
53], is denied.
Dated this 22nd day of November, 2013.
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT 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?