Stewart et al v. Lake et al

Filing 2

OPINION & ORDER: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h) (3) requires a Court to dismiss an action if it "determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction." Moreover, a district court has the inherent authority to sua sponte dismiss a complaint as frivolous "where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Accordingly, the Court dismisses this action. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan, PART ONE on 3/20/2017) (anc) Modified on 3/20/2017 (anc).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 1:09-md-02013-PAC Document
------------------------------ X 57 Filed 09/30/10 Page 1 of 45
ELLIE STEWART, JANETTE P.
:
BOWEN, CHARLES SIDDEN, MICHAEL :
USDC SDNY
DOUGLAS, YVONNE SINGLETON,
:
DOCUMENT
LEVEDA CURRY, GEANE HEWITT
:
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
GITTENS, DELILAH BURROWES,
:
DOC #: _________________
DEDRIE E. PARIS, IDRISSA GAYE, :
DATE FILED: 03/20/2017
:
and DEBORAH ALEX-SAUNDERS,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
:
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Plaintiffs,
:
-----------------------------------------------------------x
::
In re FANNIE MAE 2008 SECURITIES
08 Civ. 7831 (PAC)
-against::
LITIGATION
09 MD 2013 (PAC)
::
MARIANNE LAKE, ROBERT BENTLEY, : :
No. 16 Misc. 351 (P1)
OPINION & ORDER
OPINION & ORDER
JAMES MACKEY, JOHN GERSPACH,
:
-----------------------------------------------------------x
BRUCE R. THOMPSON, ALEEM
:
GILLANI, BRUCE ROSE, DARYL
:
BIBLE, KELLY KING, JOHN
:
SHREWSBERRY, JOHN CROTTY, United States District Judge:
V. BRITTI,
:
HONORABLE PAUL A.
CHRISTOPHER HALMY, JANET
:
:
MCCLUSKY, PAUL INCE, LEWIS
HOWARD WISHBA, TAJ J. BINDRA,
:
BACKGROUND1
ANDY CECERE, STEFAN KRAUSE,
:
:
MARCUS SCHENCK, and MARK
The early years of this decade saw a boom in home financing which was fueled, among
HELMY,
:
:
other things, by low interest rates and lax credit conditions. New lending instruments, such as
Defendants.
:
------------------------------ X
subprime mortgages (high credit risk loans) and Alt-A mortgages (low-documentation loans)
JOHN F. KEENAN, United States District Judge:
kept the boom going. Borrowers played a role too; they took on unmanageable risks on the
On September 29, 2016, pro se plaintiffs filed an “Abstract
assumption that the market would continue to rise and that refinancing options would always be
of Judgment and Statement of Claim Collateral Estoppel and the
available in the future. Lending discipline was lacking in the system. Mortgage originators did
Administrative Process” in Part One of this Court. These
not hold these high-risk mortgage loans. Rather than carry the rising risk on their books, the
plaintiffs have previously filed substantially similar
originators sold their loans into the secondary mortgage market, often as securitized packages
complaints in the Eastern District of New York, Mele v. Fed.
known as mortgage-backed securities (“MBSs”). MBS markets grew almost exponentially.
Res. Bd., Case No. 14 Civ. 7425, and in this Court, Stewart v.
But then the housing bubble burst. In 2006, the demand for housing dropped abruptly
Lake, Case No. 16 Civ. 2684. In each of these cases, the Court
and home prices began to fall. In light of the changing housing market, banks modified their
lending practices and became unwilling to refinance home mortgages without refinancing.
1

1

Unless otherwise indicated, all references cited as “(¶ _)” or to the “Complaint” are to the Amended Complaint,

dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
and failure to comply with Federal Rule of Procedure 8, which
governs pleadings in federal court. See Stewart, No. 16 Civ.
2684, ECF No. 16; Mele, No. 14 Civ. 7425, ECF No. 23.
Review of the “Abstract of Judgment and Statement of Claim
Collateral Estoppel and the Administrative Process” reveals the
same infirmities present in the complaints dismissed in
plaintiffs’ other actions filed in this Circuit:

lack of

subject matter jurisdiction and failure to comply with Federal
Rule of Procedure 8.
Frankly, this document is incoherent.

It fails to include

either a “short and plain statement of the grounds for the
court’s jurisdiction” or a “short and plain statement of the
claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 8(a)(1)-(2).

Mindful as the Court is that these

litigants appear pro se, the Court construes this document
liberally. Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471,
474 (2d Cir. 2006) (per curiam).

Even so, the only basis

identified for subject matter jurisdiction is the Declaratory
Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201.

But “[t]he Declaratory Judgment

Act does not expand the jurisdiction of the federal courts.”
Nike, Inc. v. Already, LLC, 663 F.3d 89, 95 (2d Cir. 2011).
Moreover, neither federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1331, or diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, exists
2

First, while the document lists several federal statutes,

here.

it fails to identify any specific facts or causes of action from
which the Court may infer federal question jurisdiction.
Second, the document includes a list of plaintiffs' and
defendants' residences, indicating a lack of complete diversity
as required by 28 U.S.C.

§

1332(a); See Briarpatch Ltd. v. Phx.

Pictures, Inc., 373 F.3d 296, 302 (2d Cir. 2004)

("The

citizenship requirement for diversity jurisdiction has been
interpreted to mean complete diversity so that each plaintiff's
citizenship must be different from the citizenship of each
defendant.").
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h) (3)

requires a Court

to dismiss an action if it "determines at any time that it lacks
subject-matter jurisdiction."

Moreover, a district court has

the inherent authority to sua sponte dismiss a complaint as
frivolous "where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in
fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).
Accordingly, the Court dismisses this action.

The Clerk of

Court is respectfully requested to close this case.
SO ORDERED.

Dated:

New York, New York
March 2 0 , 2 017

sp~l te~
~

(~

John F. Keenan
United States District Judge
PART ONE

3