Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Tobin v. National Trust' Co. as Trustee for Alliance Bancorp Trust BC Bancorp

July 23, 2010

TOBIN ET AL, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
NATIONAL TRUST' COMPANY AS TRUSTEE FOR ALLIANCE BANCORP TRUST BC BANCORP ET AL, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. William V. Gallo U.S. Magistrate Judge

ORDER ON JOINT DISPUTE STATEMENT REGARDING DEFENDANT DEUTSCHE BANK (Doc. No. 139)

Plaintiffs and Defendants filed a Joint Dispute Statement. (Doc. No. 139.) Plaintiff objects to Defendant Deutsche Bank's responses to Document Production Requests, and 30(b)(6) witness production, and requests sanctions against Defendant IndyMac Bank for alleged failure to comply with the Court's previous discovery orders. The Court finds as set forth below.

I. BACKGROUND

The Court convened a Discovery Hearing on March 3, 2010. The Court addressed discovery disputes regarding the Plaintiffs' 30(b)(6) deposition notice and requests for document production from Defendants Wells Fargo, Indymac Federal Bank, and Elke Poerschke. The Plaintiffs propounded voluminous requests on these three defendants and the Court expended four hours to parse through the numerous requests. (See Doc. No. 125.) At the March 3, 2010, hearing the Court opined that any future disputes with other defendants regarding the same subject matter would be resolved "consistent and the same" with the rulings provided that day. (Tr. 58:6.)

II. DEFENDANT DEUTSCHE BANK

Presently before the Court, is an identical dispute between Plaintiffs and Defendant Deutsche Bank. The document production requests and deposition notice served on Defendant Deutsche are substantially similar to the topics noticed to the other defendants and the subject matter encompassed within these requests was addressed by the Court on March 3, 2010. Defendant Deutsche Bank contends that the Court's previous order resolves the instant dispute entirely. The Court agrees absent one exception: Plaintiffs are entitled to a copy of the pooling and servicing agreement that sets forth Defendant's obligations and responsibilities as requested in Request for Production 27. Based on these forgoing events and findings, the Court rules as follows.

A. Document Production Requests Set One

Document Production Request 1 Defendant must provide a copy of the controlling Pooling and Servicing Loan Agreement to Plaintiffs. In all other regards, Defendant's objections are sustained.

Document Production Request 2 Defendant's response to provide copies of the note, deed of trust, and title policy, is sufficient. No further response compelled.

Document Production Request 3

The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 4 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 5 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 6 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 7 Defendant's response to provide copies of the note, deed of trust, and title policy, is sufficient. No further response compelled.

Document Production Request 8

The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 9 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 10 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 11 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 12 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 13 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 14 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 15 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 16 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 17 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No further response compelled. Document Production Request 18 The Court's previous order addresses this request. No ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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