First Magnus Financial Corporation v. Rondeau et al

Filing 310

ORDER Denying 221 MOTION to Dismiss. Defendants' answers due by 11/30/11. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 11/10/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ASB)

1
2
3
4
5
6

RONALD J. THOMPSON, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 5524
WILLIAM N. MILLER, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 11658
SANTORO, DRIGGS, WALCH,
KEARNEY, HOLLEY & THOMPSON
400 South Fourth Street, Third Floor
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
E-mail: [e-mail]

10

TODD A. BURGESS, ESQ.
(admitted Pro Hac Vice)
GALLAGHER & KENNEDY, P.A.
2575 E. Camelback Rd., Suite 1100
Phoenix, Arizona 85016
Telephone: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

11

Attorneys for Plaintiff

7
8
9

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

14
15
16

MORRIS C. AARON, Liquidating Trustee of the
First Magnus Liquidating Trust, real party in
interest for FIRST MANGUS FINANCIAL
CORPORATION,

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Hearing Date: November 1, 2011
Hearing Time: 10:30 a.m.

v.

18

20

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Plaintiff,

17

19

CASE NO. 2:07-CV-00132-JCM-PAL

CARA MARIA GUDELIS and JOHN DOE
GUDELIS, a married couple; RUDOLF STRAAT
and JANE DOE STRAAT, a married couple;
PAUL HILL, SR. and JANE DOE HILL, a
married couple; PAUL HILL, II and JANE DOE
HILL, a married couple; MICHAEL MULLINS
and JANE DOE MULLINS, a married couple;
DWAYNE R. SMITH and JANE DOE SMITH, a
married couple; TIMOTHY ENGEN and JANE
DOE ENGEN, a married couple; OPTIONS ARE
US, INC., a Nevada corporation; PANTHER
INVESTMENTS, a Nevada entity; FAT CAT
REAL ESTATE, LLC, a Nevada limited liability
company; NUTEX CONSTRUCTION, INC., a
Nevada
Corporation;
ACCURATE
ACCOUNTING AND INNOVATIVE TAX
SERVICE, a dissolved Michigan corporation;
KELSEY, LLC, a Nevada limited liability
company; SW CAPITAL CORPORATION, a
Nevada or Texas entity; ACE APPRAISALS

-109378-01/816595.doc

1
2
3

CORPORATION,
a
Nevada
corporation;
STODDARD & ASSOCIATES, a Nevada
corporation; COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE
COMPANY, a Nevada corporation; LAWYERS
TITLE OF NEVADA, INC., a Nevada
corporation,

4
5

Defendants.
_________________________________________

6

THIS MATTER COMES BEFORE THE COURT pursuant to the June 15, 2011 Mandate

7

of the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit [Dkt. 270], reversing the Court’s Order

8

Granting Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. 248] and remanding for further proceedings on the Motion to

9

Dismiss Action with Prejudice and on the Merits Pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Fed. R. Civ. P.

10

and LR 41-1 (the “Motion to Dismiss”) [Dkt. 221] filed by Defendants Advance Title, First

11

American Title Insurance Company, Carol Bragdon, and Tara Monjure, which was joined by

12

Defendants Cara Maria Gudelis, Panther Investments, Rudolph Straat and Options Are Us, Inc.

13

[Dkt. 223], Joseph Appraisal Group Nevada and Maria Miller [Dkt. 226], Camelback Title

14

Agency, Priscilla Cruz, and John F. Cruz [Dft. 229], Brian Haneline, Malissa Lang, and Ace

15

Appraisals Corporation [Dkt. 233], Commonwealth Land Title and Lawyers Title of Nevada

16

[Dkt. 241], and Definitive Appraisals, Inc., and Jennifer Sagers [Dkt. 246].

17

In accordance with the Court’s October 4, 2011 Order, Plaintiff Morris C. Aaron,

18

Liquidating Trustee of the First Magnus Liquidating Trust, and real party in interest for First

19

Magnus Financial Corporation [Dkt. 297], Defendants Commonwealth Land Title Insurance

20

Company and Lawyers Title of Nevada [Dkt. 294], and Defendants Ace Appraisals, Corp., Brian

21

Haneline, and Malissa Lang [Dkt. 296] each filed supplemental briefs regarding their respective

22

views on the application of the facts of this case to the analysis of the factors identified in the

23

Ninth Circuit’s decision in Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1423 (9th Cir. 1986). On

24

November 1, 2011, the Court heard oral argument on the Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. No. 221].

25

Based on all of the foregoing, and the entire record before the Court, for the reasons stated on the

26

record during the November 1, 2011 hearing, and good cause appearing,

27
28

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Motion to Dismiss
[Dkt. 221], and all joinders thereto, are denied without prejudice; and

-209378-01/816595.doc

1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that all defendants in this

2

action shall have twenty (20) days from the date of this Order to file an answer or other pleading

3

responsive to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint [Dkt. 295].

4
___________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
November 10, 2011
DATED: ___________________

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-309378-01/816595.doc