Williams v. Federal National Mortgage Association et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 33 Opposed EMERGENCY MOTION for Preliminary Injunction, and MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order. (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified. (aboyd, 4)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FIRST MAGNUS FINANCIAL
CORPORATION, FEDERAL NATIONAL
MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION as
TRUSTEE FOR SECURITIZED TRUST
FANNIE MAE GUARANTEED REMIC
PASS THROUGH CERTIFICATES
REMIC TRUST 2007-73, MORTGAGE
SYSTEM a/k/a MERS, DOES 1
THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE, ANY
LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
CHARGED WITH ENFORCEMENT OF A
WRIT OF POSSESSION,
CIVIL ACTION NO. G-13-0318
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Emergency Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order and Request
Plaintiff's Application will be denied.
Plaintiff obtained a home equity loan in 2006. 1
entered into financial difficulties thereafter in 2009, and went
1Plaintiff's Application, Docket Entry No. 33, p. 5 ~ 15.
(Page citations are to the pagination imprinted at the top of the
page by the federal court's electronic filing system.)
into default on his payments." 2
On January I,
property was sold to Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie
at a foreclosure sale. 3
Fannie Mae obtained a judgment of
eviction in June of 2013 and "a writ of possession has issued on
the judgment." 4
On June 25,
Plaintiff brought this action challenging
and making other claims
District Court of Brazoria County, Texas, where it was filed under
Cause No. 73176. 5
Defendants removed the action to this court. 6
On May 16, 2014, "the constable notified Plaintiff that Fannie
Mae had requested Plaintiff be evicted, and the constable plans to
evict Plaintiff on May 27, 2014."7
Plaintiff seeks a temporary restraining order to prevent the
A movant for a preliminary injunction must demonstrate
"(1) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits,
(2) a substantial threat that failure to grant the
injunction will result in irreparable injury, (3) the
3Id. at 4
4Id. at 4 ~ 13.
5Plaintiff's Original Petition, Exhibit
Removal, Docket Entry No. 1-2, pp. 3-43.
6Notice of Removal, Docket Entry No.1.
7Plaintiff's Application, Docket Entry No. 33, p. 4 ~ 12.
injury outweighs any damage
injunction may cause the opposing party, and (4)
injunction will not disserve the public interest."
Reeves v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage,
431 F. App'x 304,
(quoting Lakedreams v. Taylor, 932 F.2d 1103, 1107 (5th
Application together with the pleadings and evidence on file and
concludes that Plaintiff has not shown a substantial likelihood of
success on the merits.
2283, to grant Plaintiff's requested
See Knoles v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 513 F. App'x 414,
No. G-13-463, 2014 WL 722398, at *2-3
(S.D. Tex. Feb. 24, 2014);
Green v. Bank of Am. N.A., No. H-13-1092, 2013 WL 2417916, at *1
(S.D. Tex. June 4,
In Knoles the Fifth Circuit upheld a
district court's denial of a temporary restraining order that would
enforcing a valid extant judgment of a Texas court," holding that
"[t]he district court is denied jurisdiction to grant that relief
by the Anti-Injunction Act."
513 F. App'x at 416.
Plaintiff acknowledges that Fannie Mae "obtained a judgment of
eviction against Plaintiff's property in Cause No.
CI 04 94 04 of
BRAZORIA County Court at Law No.1; on or about June 20, 2013," and
Plaintiff brought this action on June 25, 2013,9 after Fannie Mae
obtained the judgment of eviction.
415-16; Brinson, 2014 WL 722398, at *3.
513 F. App'x at
"To the extent that there
was a forcible detainer proceeding and an eviction order,
court lacks the ability to provide the requested relief [because]
\ [t]he Anti-Injunction Act generally prohibits federal courts from
WL 241796, at *1 (quoting Health Net, Inc. v. Wooley, 534 F.3d 487,
493 (5th Cir. 2008)).
Conclusion and Order
pleadings and evidence on file,
and the relevant law,
Temporary Restraining Order and Request for Hearing on Preliminary
Injunction (Docket Entry No. 33) should be and is hereby DENIED.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this 23rd day of May, 2014.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
BPlaintiff's Application, Docket Entry No. 33, p. 4 ~ 13.
9Plaintiff's Original Petition, Exhibit
Removal, Docket Entry No. 1-2, pp. 3-43.
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?