Lysack v. SunTrust Bank et al
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 7 Motion to Dismiss by SunTrust Bank. Signed by District Judge Martin Reidinger on 9/30/2013. (tmg)
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CIVIL CASE NO. 1:12-cv-000204-MR
GLEN J. LYSACK,
SUNTRUST BANK and APRIL
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss [Doc. 7].
The facts, legal issues, and causes of action asserted by the parties
in the present matter are substantially similar to those in the case of
Barnard, et al. v. SunTrust Bank, et al., No. 1:11-cv-00289-MR (W.D.N.C.),
and the same attorneys appear on behalf of the parties in each of these
actions. Even though these cases have not been consolidated, and were
in fact previously severed [see Civil Case No. 1:11-cv-00289-MR, Doc. 27],
the Order of this Court previously entered in Barnard addresses and
disposes of all of the issues raised by the motion currently before the Court
in this matter. The Order in Barnard, therefore, is incorporated herein, and
the current motion will be disposed of in accord therewith.
As the Plaintiff has taken a voluntary dismissal of their action against
Defendant April Kisselburg Davis, the motion to dismiss will be denied as
moot with respect to that Defendant.
IT IS, THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 7] is
GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Specifically, with respect to
the Plaintiff’s claim against SunTrust Bank for negligent misrepresentation,
the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 7] is GRANTED and this claim is DISMISSED.
In all other respects, the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 7] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: September 30, 2013
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?