USA et al v. American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc et al

Filing 409

ORDER denying 404 Motion for Entry of Judgment under Rule 54b. Signed by Honorable Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. on 09/22/2014.(bshr, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA United States Of America, ex rel. Lynn E. Szymoniak, C/A No. 0:10-cv-01465-JFA Plaintiffs, vs. American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.; Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.; Lender Processing Services, Inc.; DocX, LLC; CitiMortgage, Inc., f/k/a Citi Residential Lending, Inc., AMC Mortgage Services, Inc.; Wells Fargo Home Mortgage d/b/a America’s Servicing Company; Bank of America Corporation, as successor-in-interest to LaSalle Bank; Bank Of New York Mellon Corporation; Citibank National Association; Deutsche Bank National Trust Company; Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas; HSBC USA National Association; J.P. Morgan Chase Bank National Association; U.S. Bank National Association; and Wells Fargo Bank National Association, ORDER Defendants. Seven defendants in this action who were dismissed by this court’s order of July 25, 2014, have moved for entry of final judgment pursuant to Rules 7(b) and 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. After reviewing the briefs on the issue and examining the totality of the circumstances in this case, the court exercises its discretion not to certify its July 25, 2014, order for interlocutory appeal. 1 It should be noted that in their memorandum of support in relation to the motion, the dismissed defendants suggest that it may be “years” before the remaining claims in this action are tried to judgment. The Court disagrees. The remaining parties to this action are hereby advised that, inasmuch as this case is over four years old, it must receive top priority in the offices of all attorneys of record, and the scheduling order established in this case will be extended only upon a strong showing of compelling circumstances. All counsel should be forewarned as to the Court’s position on moving towards a trial in this case, and should plan their schedules and decide upon accepting employment in future cases with this in mind. IT IS SO ORDERED. September 22, 2014 Columbia, South Carolina Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. United States District Judge 2

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?