Linehan v. AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc.

Filing 367

ORDER granting Defendant King County's 337 Motion for Summary Judgment; dismissing King County with prejudice from each of these consolidated cases; terminating King County as a party in this case, by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (SWT)

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9
10

TIMOTHY LINEHAN, on behalf of
Plaintiff and a class,
Plaintiff,

11

14

ALLIANCEONE RECEIVABLES
MANAGEMENT, INC.,
Defendant.

15
16

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT

v.

12
13

CASE NO. C15-1012-JCC

This matter comes before the Court on the motion for summary judgment dismissal by

17 Defendant King County (Dkt. No. 337). The Court shall grant summary judgment if the moving
18 party shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the moving party is
19 entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).
20

King County was joined as a Defendant in these consolidated cases based on Plaintiffs’

21 challenge to the validity of a King County District Court general administrative order (GAO).
22 (Dkt. No. 162 at 15-16.) Based on this Court’s determination that the GAO was preempted, (see
23 Dkt. No. 26 at 3-4), the King County District Court rescinded the GAO and is no longer
24 enforcing its provisions. (Dkt. No. 337 at 5; Dkt. No. 338 at 3; Dkt. No. 338-1 at 5.) King
25 County thus seeks to be dismissed from this case because it no longer has interest in the GAO
26 and no party has requested relief against King County. (Dkt. No. 337 at 1, 5.)

PAGE - 1

1

Plaintiffs do not oppose King County’s motion, provided that it confirms it does not

2 intend to resume the challenged practice of using GAOs to assign civil collection cases of certain
3 debt collection agencies and collection attorneys to particular divisions of the King County
4 District Court. (Dkt. No. 360 at 2.) In reply, King County submits a declaration from Presiding
5 Judge Donna Tucker, who states: “As District Court Presiding Judge, I can confirm that the
6 District Court has no present intention of adopting another GAO that would conflict with the
7 current venue requirements of the FDCPA.” (Dkt. No. 366 at 2.)
8

Accordingly, King County’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 337) is

9 GRANTED. King County is DISMISSED with prejudice from each of these consolidated cases.
10 The Clerk is directed to TERMINATE King County as a party in this case.
11

DATED this 11th day of April 2017.

12
13
14

A

15
16
17

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
PAGE - 2