Banton v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC

Filing 2

ORDER that 1 Motion to Withdraw Reference is DENIED. Case terminated. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 10/2/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 *** 7 MARY BANTON, Case No. 2:17-CV-141 JCM (PAL) 8 Plaintiff(s), 9 10 ORDER v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, 11 Defendant(s). 12 13 14 Presently before the court is plaintiff Mary Banton’s motion to withdraw reference. (ECF No. 1). 15 Plaintiff is currently undergoing Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceedings. (ECF Nos 1, 1-1). 16 While in bankruptcy, plaintiff filed a complaint against Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, alleging causes 17 of action arising out of a mortgage refinancing. Id. Plaintiff asserts claims for unjust enrichment, 18 breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violations of 12 C.F.R. § 19 1024.35, 1024.36 and 1024.36(c). Id. 20 The Bankruptcy Code does not define what constitutes cause under 28 U.S.C. § 157(d). 21 However, courts have looked at a number of factors, including, “(1) efficient use of judicial 22 resources; (2) delay and costs to parties; (3) uniformity of bankruptcy administration; (4) 23 prevention of forum shopping; and other related factors.” In re Access Ins. Servs., Inc. No. 3:13- 24 cv-00699-MMD, 2014 WL 6065641, at *1 (D. Nev. Nov 12, 2014) (citing Sec. Farms v. Int’l Bhd. 25 of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers, 124 F.3d 999, 1008 (9th Cir.1999)). 26 Here, the action should remain a part of the bankruptcy proceeding. The proceeding relates 27 to debtor’s bankruptcy, and the factors listed above counsel in favor of maintaining the action in 28 the bankruptcy court. And while plaintiff notes that the action is a non-core proceeding, (ECF No. James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge 1 1), “[a] bankruptcy judge may hear a proceeding that is not a core proceeding but that is otherwise 2 related to a case under title 11.” 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1). Plaintiff’s motion does not present 3 adequate grounds for this court to withdraw the action pursuant to § 157(d). 4 Accordingly, 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s motion (ECF 6 7 8 9 No. 1) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED. DATED October 2, 2017. __________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge -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?