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.

Cruz v. Old Republic Default Management Services

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 16, 2012

CRUZ
v.
OLD REPUBLIC DEFAULT MANAGEMENT SERVICES, ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable A. Howard Matz, U.S. District Judge

JS-6; O

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Present: The Honorable A. HOWARD MATZ, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Stephen Montes Not Reported

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No.

Attorneys NOT Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys NOT Present for Defendants:

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS (No Proceedings Held)

For the following reasons, the Court on its own motion REMANDS this case to San Bernardino County Superior Court.

On February 10, 2011, Plaintiff Oscar Cruz, pro se, filed suit in state court against Defendants Old Republic Default Management Services and AMS Servicing, LLC.*fn1

Plaintiff alleged five causes of action, none of which presented a federal question. On April 7, 2012, Defendants filed a demurrer to Plaintiff's complaint. After the state court sustained Defendants' demurrer and granted Plaintiff thirty days to amend his complaint, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC") on June 1, 2011. Among other claims, the FAC alleged violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 ("RESPA"), 12 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et seq. On June 15, 2011, Defendants removed the case to federal court based on the federal question presented by the new RESPA claim. On June 23, 2011, Defendants moved to dismiss the FAC. I granted that motion on March 15, 2012, and stated in the Order: "If Plaintiff . . . file[s] a Second Amended Complaint in time, but if the sole claim (RESPA) warranting federal jurisdiction is again defective, the Court may exercise its authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 to remand the remaining claims to state court." (Dkt. 14, at 11.)

On April 3, 2012, Plaintiff filed his SAC. (Dkt. 15.) In the SAC, Plaintiff no longer alleges violations of RESPA, and all of the remaining claims are made pursuant to various sections of the California Civil Code.*fn2 So I now exercise my authority under section 1367 to remand the remaining claims to San Bernardino County Superior Court. Not only do the state law claims "substantially predominate" over any claims presenting a federal question, but Plaintiff no longer even alleges the sole claim that warranted federal jurisdiction and resulted in removal from state court. Nor has Plaintiff pointed to any exceptional circumstances or compelling reasons why the Court should retain jurisdiction despite the absence in the SAC of the claim that provided the basis for removal in the first Accordingly, the Court REMANDS this case to San Bernardino Superior Court.

No hearing is necessary. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15.

Initials of Preparer SMO


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.