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.

Eva Morrow v. Wells Fargo's Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Northern District of California San Francisco Division


August 22, 2012

EVA MORROW,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
WELLS FARGO'S BANK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Laurel Beeler United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER REGARDING THE SERVICE OF DEFENDANT CAL-WESTERN AND SETTING HEARING ON C WELLS FARGO DEFENDANT

Plaintiff Eva Morrow filed suit against Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo") and For the Northern District of California For the Northern District of California

[Re: ECF Nos. 1, 5, 6]

Cal-Western Reconveyance Corporation ("Cal-Western") in Alameda County Superior Court for alleged misconduct in relation to those entities' foreclosure on her property. See Notice of Removal, 19 ECF No. 1 at 2.*fn1 Wells Fargo removed the action to this court on June 13, 2012, and it moved to 20 dismiss Mr. Morrow's First Amended Complaint and for an order expunging a lis pendens. Notice 21 of Removal, ECF No. 1; Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 5; Motion to Expunge, ECF No. 6. 22 Once a case has been removed from state court, it is subject to the Federal Rules of Civil 23 Procedure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 81(c)(1). 24 As far as the court knows, Ms. Morrow did not serve Cal-Western prior to Wells Fargo's 25 removal of the action on June 13, 2012. Thus, Ms. Morrow has until October 11, 2012 to serve Cal-26 27 1 Western. See 28 U.S.C. § 1448 (" In all cases removed from any State court to any district court of 2 the United States in which any one or more of the defendants has not been served with process or in 3 which the service has not been perfected prior to removal, or in which process served proves to be 4 defective, such process or service may be completed or new process issued in the same manner as in 5 cases originally filed in such district court."); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (allowing, in the absence of good 6 cause, a plaintiff 120 days to serve a defendant). 7 Because Cal-Western's status as a defendant to this action is essential to the resolution of Wells 8 Fargo's motions-Ms. Morrow argues that Cal-Western's inclusion as a named defendant destroys 9 the court's diversity jurisdiction, but Cal-Western must be served to become a party to this action, 10 Murphy Bros., Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc., 526 U.S. 344, 350 (1999) ("[O]ne becomes a 11 party officially, and is required to take action in that capacity, only upon service of a summons or 12 other authority-asserting measure stating the time within which the party served must appear and 13 defend.")-the court vacated the August 2, 2012 hearing date.

Accordingly, Ms. Morrow shall file a proof of Cal-Western's service no later than October 12, 2012. Wells Fargo's motion to dismiss and motion to expunge a lis pendens is set for hearing on D 16 November 1, 2012.


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.