Hall v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC et al

Filing 20

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: For the reasons stated above, Hall's January 31, 2014 filing is deemed to be a motion for reconsideration and is denied. Ordered by Judge Eric N. Vitaliano on 2/6/2014. (Fernandez, Erica)

.UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------------- X

ANTHONY W. HALL, as Trustee for B.A.H.
Private Interest Foundation Holdings Trust,
Plaintiff,

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

-against-

13-cv-05550 (ENV) (CLP)

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC,
AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE CORP.,
HOMEWARD RESIDENTIAL, INC.,
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION:
SYSTEMS, INC. (MERS), FEDERAL
NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION,
BRADY NICHAS, MATTHEW J.
JOHNSTONE, JOHN/JANE DOE,

FILED

IN CLERK'S OFFICE

U.S.!:" -~~•<CT couRT E.O.N.V..

* Fi::B 1 1 2014 *

'1

BROOKLYN OFFICE!

Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------------- X

VITALIANO, D.J.,
Plaintiff Anthony W. Hall, appearing prose in his capacity as trustee for
B.A.H. Private Interest Foundation Holdings Trust (the "trust"), commenced this
action in Supreme Court, Kings County, asserting various state and federal law
claims against the defendants. Defendants Nationstar Mortgage LLC
("Nationstar"), Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("MERS"), and
Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae") (collectively, the
"Nationstar defendants") removed the suit to this Court on October 8, 2013, on the
grounds of federal question and diversity jurisdiction. By Order entered on
November 27, 2013, a copy of which is annexed to this Order, this Court granted
Hall 30 days in which to appear by a licensed attorney admitted to practice before

1

this Court, on the ground that a trust may only appear in this Court through an
attorney. On January 16, 2014, Hall having made no appearance by an attorney,
this Court dismissed the case without prejudice.
On January 31, 2014, Hall, still representing himself, filed a document that
the Court will treat as a motion for reconsideration of the Order dismissing the case.
Since reconsideration would be futile in light of Hall's lack of counsel, the motion is
denied. However, the Court notes that this case was dismissed without prejudice.
Therefore, if plaintiff has obtained counsel, which is essential for the reasons stated
in the November 27, 2013 Order, counsel may refile this case at any time, subject to
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rules.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, Hall's January 31, 2014 filing is deemed to be a
motion for reconsideration and is denied.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
February 6, 2014

/
s/Eric N. Vitaliano
=:-::":'"":":~~~--r:7')
ERICN. VITALIANO
0

United States District Judge

2