Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hrim v. Homecomings Financial

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 26, 2010

KEVIN J. HRIM, AND MARYBETH HRIM, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLC; HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL NETWORK, INC.; PROFESSIONAL MORTGAGE BROKERS, INC. DBA VINTAGE MORTGAGE GROUP; LAURA E. RANEY; ROSLYN ROGERS; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; AND DOES 1-20, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This action arises out of a mortgage loan transaction in which Plaintiffs Kevin Hrim and Marybeth Hrim ("Plaintiffs") financed their home in 2005. Presently before the Court is a Motion by Defendants Homecomings Financial LLC f/k/a Homecomings Financial Network, Inc. and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("Defendants") to Dismiss the claims alleged against them in Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Concurrently, Defendants Professional Mortgage Brokers Inc., dba Vintage Mortgage Group, Laura Raney, and Roslyn Rogers (also "Defendants") have similarly moved to dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint alleges only state law causes of action. Plaintiffs' Oppositions to the Motions to Dismiss acknowledges the lack of a federal cause of action and requests that the Court take notice that the Second Amended Complaint contains no federal claims. Plaintiffs further state that they have "no objection to the Court's dismissal without prejudice of this matter." Pls.' Opp. to Mot. to Dismiss 2:12-14.

With only Plaintiffs' state law claims remaining, this Court ceases to have subject matter jurisdiction over the suit. The Court declines to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state causes of action and they are dismissed without prejudice. The Court need not address the merits of Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Docket No. 50 and 51) as those issues are now moot.*fn1

Plaintiffs are cautioned against filing complaints in this Court and then dismissing the federal claims as soon as a Motion to Dismiss is filed.

For the reasons stated above, the case is dismissed. The Clerk is directed to close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.