Hoffman v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. et al

Filing 28

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that Ds Countrywide, ReconTrust, and MER's 25 motion for clarification is GRANTED. FURTH ORD that P shall have 14 days w/in which to file an amended complaint. Signed by Judge Edward C. Reed, Jr on 5/3/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PM)

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
5
6
7
HANNELORE M. HOFFMAN,
8
Plaintiff,
9
vs.
10
COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.;
11 RECONTRUST COMPANY, N.A.;
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION
12 SYSTEMS, INC. [MERS]; FIRST
AMERICAN TITLE; CHARLOTTE OLMOS;
13 and DOES 1-25 CORPORATIONS, DOES
and ROES 1-25 Individuals,
14 Partnerships, or anyone claiming
any interest to the property
15 described in the action
16

Defendants.

17

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

3:11-CV-00201-ECR-WGC
Order

18
On

March 28, 2012, Defendants Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.

19
(“Countrywide”), Recontrust Company, N.A. (“ReconTrust”), and Mortgage
20
Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”) filed a motion for
21
clarification (#25) of the Court’s previous Order (#24) dismissing
22
Plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend.
23
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a), “[t]he court
24
may correct a clerical mistake or a mistake arising from oversight or
25
omission whenever one is found in a judgment, order, or other part of
26
the record.”
27
28

1

The Court agrees with Defendants that the previous Order (#24)

2 contained clerical errors rendering it ambiguous.

As was apparent

3 from the analysis in the Court’s Order (#24), Plaintiff was not and
4 will not be given leave to amend her sixth cause of action for a quiet
5 title action and the portion of the seventh cause of action regarding
6 fraud through omission.

Further, Plaintiff was given leave to amend

7 the portion of the seventh cause of action regarding fraud in the
8 inducement.

Accordingly, the Court will submit an amended order so

9 that the conclusions therein will match the analysis in its body.
10

Further, the Court will further clarify here that Plaintiff has

11 not and will be not granted leave to amend the following claims stated
12 in the original complaint (#1-3): (1) Debt Collection Violations; (2)
13 Violation of Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practice Act; (3) Violation of
14 Unfair Lending Practices, N.R.S. 598D.100; (5) Violation of NRS
15 107.080 et seq.; (6) Quiet Title Action; (7) Fraud Through Omission;
16 (8) Slander of Title; (9) Abuse of Process.

Plaintiff has been

17 granted leave to amend the following claims: (4) Violation of the
18 Covenant of Good Faith

and

Fair Dealing; and (7) Fraud in the

19 Inducement.
20
21
22
23
24

IT IS, THEREFORE, HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Countrywide,

25 ReconTrust, and MERS’s motion for clarification (#25) is GRANTED.
26
27
28

2

1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have fourteen (14)

2 days within which to file an amended complaint.
3
4
5
6
7 DATED: May 3, 2012.
8
____________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

3