Datatreasury Corporation v. Wells Fargo & Company et al

Filing 204

RESPONSE in Opposition re 125 MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed by Suntrust Banks, Inc., Suntrust Bank. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Baxter, Samuel)

Download PDF
Datatreasury Corporation v. Wells Fargo & Company et al Doc. 204 Case 2:06-cv-00072-DF-CMC Document 204 Filed 06/22/2006 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION DATATREASURY CORPORATION, Plaintiff v. WELLS FARGO & CO., et al., Defendants DEFENDANTS SUNTRUST BANKS, INC.'S AND SUNTRUST BANK'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONSOLIDATION Defendants SunTrust Banks, Inc. and SunTrust Bank (collectively "SunTrust"), submit this Response in opposition to Plaintiff DataTreasury Corporation's ("DTC") Motion for Consolidation (Docket No. 125). Consolidation of this case with all of DTC's previously filed cases is not warranted because individual issues in the cases greatly predominate over any common issues. As a result, consolidation will cause the parties inconvenience, delay, prejudice and expense. Consolidation is also not warranted because the cases sought to be consolidated are at vastly different stages of proceedings. Lastly, even if there are common issues that might benefit from consolidation, these issues can just as easily be dealt with through coordination of certain pretrial activities among counsel in the various cases. In support of this Response and in the interest of brevity, SunTrust relies on and incorporates herein by reference as if set forth verbatim the arguments presented in the Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Consolidation1 ("Joint Response") filed on June CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-72 DF 1 The Joint Response was filed on behalf of Defendants Bank of America Corporation; Bank of America, N.A.; Bank of New York Co., Inc.; Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd.; BB&T Dallas 221404v1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:06-cv-00072-DF-CMC Document 204 Filed 06/22/2006 Page 2 of 3 22, 2006 (Docket No. 199). SunTrust bases this Response on the arguments and legal authorities set forth in the Joint Response, and seeks the same relief requested therein. Dated: June 22, 2006 Respectfully submitted, McKOOL SMITH, P.C. /s/ Sam Baxter SAM BAXTER Lead Attorney Texas State Bar No. 01938000 sbaxter@mckoolsmith.com THEODORE STEVENSON, III Texas State Bar No. 19196650 tstevenson@mckoolsmith.com GARRET W. CHAMBERS Texas State Bar No. 00792160 gchambers@mckoolsmith.com L. DAVID ANDERSON Texas State Bar No. 00796126 danderson@mckoolsmith.com 300 Crescent Court Suite 1500 Telephone: (214) 978-4000 Telecopier: (214) 978-4044] PETER J. AYERS Texas State Bar No. 24009882 payers@mckoolsmith.com 300 W. 6th Street, Suite 1700 Austin, Texas 78701 Telephone: (512) 692-8700 Telecopy: (512) 692-8744 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS SUNTRUST BANKS, INC. AND SUNTRUST BANK Corporation; Branch Banking and Trust Company; Citizens Financial Group, Inc.; Comerica Bank & Trust, N.A.; Comerica Incorporated; Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc.; Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas; First Data Corporation; LaSalle Bank Corporation; LaSalle Bank, N.A; M&T Bank Corporation.; M&T Bank; Remitco, LLC; TeleCheck Services, Inc.; The Bank of New York; The Frost National Bank; UBS Americas, Inc.; Union Bank of California, N.A.; Wachovia Bank, N.A.; Wachovia Corporation; U.S. Bancorp; U.S. Bank National Association; National City Corporation; National City Bank; Zions Bancorporation; Zions First National Bank; Wells Fargo & Company; and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 2 Dallas 221404v1 Case 2:06-cv-00072-DF-CMC Document 204 Filed 06/22/2006 Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this document was served on all counsel who have consented to electronic service on this the 22nd day of June, 2006.. Local Rule CV5(a)(3)(A). /s/ L. David Anderson L. David Anderson Dallas 221404v1 3

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?