Lee et al v. Sierra Pacific Mortgage Company, Inc., a California corporation et al

Filing 47

ORDER granting 37 defendants' Motion to Stay the proceedings pending a decision of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all proceedings in this case are stayed pending Judge Teilborg's order to remand defendants and claims back to this court. See order re specifics. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 3/5/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SL)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Plaintiffs, 11 v. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) RICHARD F. LEE and AUNETTA M. ROACH, 3:09-cv-00590-LRH-RAM ORDER SIERRA PACIFIC MORTGAGE COMPANY; et al., Defendants. Before the court is defendants' motion to stay the proceedings pending a decision of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Doc. #371. I. Facts and Procedural History In 2009, the United States Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation ("panel") consolidated numerous cases in which plaintiffs allege that MERS engaged in improper business practices when processing home loans. The panel assigned Judge Teilborg in the District of Arizona to oversee these cases, and he will preside over all issues (discovery, dispositive motions, settlement) except for trials. In re: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) Litigation, MDL No. 2119. In its decision to create this MDL litigation, the Panel consolidated nine cases from Nevada, but noted Refers to the court's docket entry number. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 that additional "tag-along" cases with similar factual issues could be added to the list of consolidated cases. Following the panel's decision, MERS moved to add numerous "tag-along" cases to the MDL, one of which is the current matter Lee, et al. v. Sierra Pacific Mortgage Company, Inc., 3:09-cv-0590-LRH-RAM. The panel ruled on MERS's tag-along motions in a series of letters issued in December 2009, and January and February 2010. The panel granted MERS' request to add the present case to the pending multi-district litigation, but only as to those individual claims that "relate to the formation and/or operation of MERS." The Panel further indicated that "all claims in these actions that are unrelated to the formation and/or operation of the MERS system are separately and simultaneously remanded" to the district court in which they were first brought. II. Discussion In the present matter, MERS filed a motion to stay the proceedings until the panel issued an order on MERS's tag-along motions and determined whether the present matter would be consolidated. The panel has already issued an order transferring this matter to MDL thereby alleviating MERS's expressed need for a stay as illuminated in the present motion. However, the court notes that MERS and the many individual plaintiffs in the tag-along cases have filed motions with Judge Teilborg in which they dispute which claims should be part of the MDL and which should be remanded to their original district. Judge Teilborg will be deciding these issues once the matter is fully briefed. Because of the high volume of cases involved in these motions, it will be a number of months until Judge Teilborg has ruled on all of the issues affecting this case. Thus the court finds that moving forward with the present matter would be improper until it is determined which defendants and claims are to be remanded to this court. Accordingly, the court hereby stays all proceedings in this case until Judge Teilborg's ruling. \\\ \\\ 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants' motion to stay (Doc. #37) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all proceedings in this case are STAYED pending Judge Teilborg's order to remand defendants and claims back to this court. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 5th day of March, 2010. __________________________________ LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3

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?