Hollyvale Rental Holdings, LLC v. Rae Nola Edwards et al
ORDER denying without prejudice ECF No. 17 Motion to Remand to State Court; Clerk instructed to strike ECF No. 39 Amended Complaint. Champery must file a second amended complaint omitting parties by 11/3/2017. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 10/27/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
CHAMPERY RENTAL REO, LLC,
Case No. 3:17-cv-00162-MMD-WGC
RAE NOLA EDWARDS; FEDERAL
NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION;
QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION; KERN & ASSOCIATES,
LTD.; SPRINGLAND VILLAGE
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION; All other
persons unknown claiming any right, title,
estate, lien or interest in the real property
described in the Complaint adverse to
Plaintiff’s ownership, or any cloud upon
Plaintiff’s title thereto; DOES I through V;
and ROE Corporations I through V,
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE
CHAMPERY RENTAL REO LLC,
On September 19, 2017, Plaintiff Champery Rental REO LLC (“Champery”) filed
an Amended Complaint (ECF No. 39) to reflect the substitution of former Plaintiff Hollyvale
Rental Holdings LLC (“Hollyvale”) and former Defendant Rae Nola Edwards. However,
the Amended Complaint also added two new parties as defendants—Kern & Associates
Ltd. (“Kern”) and Springland Village Homeowners Association (“Springland”)—without
leave of Court as is required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). While the
Court had permitted substitution of Plaintiff Champery for Hollyvale (ECF No. 38) and
substitution of Defendant Unknown Heirs of Rae Nola Edwards (“Unknown Heirs”) for Rae
Nola Edwards (ECF No. 25), it did not permit the addition of new defendants. Therefore,
the Court will strike Champery’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 39) with leave for
Champery to file a second amended complaint to reflect the substitution of Champery and
Unknown Heirs. In light of these substitutions, the Court denies former Plaintiff Hollyvale’s
Motion to Remand (ECF No. 17) without prejudice, as that motion failed to address the
citizenship of Champery1 or whether and how the Court should consider the citizenship of
Unknown Heirs in its analysis of jurisdiction.2
It is therefore ordered that Hollyvale’s Motion to Remand (ECF No. 17) is denied
without prejudice. Champery may file a new motion to remand within seven (7) days of
The Clerk is instructed to strike Champery’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 39).
Champery must file a second amended complaint omitting the added parties—Kern and
Springland—and including only the substituted parties—Champery and Unknown Heirs—
within seven (7) days of this order. Failure to file a second amended complaint within that
time will result in dismissal of this case.
DATED this 27th day of October 2017.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
LLC is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens.
Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006).
2It is unclear whether Unknown Heirs constitute “fictitious defendants” for purposes
of determining diversity jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(1) (“In determining whether
a civil action is removable on the basis of [diversity jurisdiction], the citizenship of
defendants sued under fictitious names shall be disregarded.”)
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?