State of Connecticut et al v. Clayton et al
| Connecticut District Court | |
| Judge: | Sarala V Nagala |
| Referred: | Thomas O Farrish |
| Case #: | 3:24-cv-01286 |
| Nature of Suit | 220 Real Property - Foreclosure |
| Cause | 42:1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Case Filed: | Aug 05, 2024 |
| Terminated: | Oct 29, 2024 |
| Last checked: Saturday Feb 01, 2025 3:30 AM EST |
|
Defendant
Willie Mae Clayton
152 Sheffield Avenue
New Haven, CT 06511 |
|
|
Defendant
Jonita Terelle Vaughn
152 Sheffield Avenue
New Haven, CT 06511 |
|
|
Defendant
Brandon Winfree Vaughn
152 Sheffield Avenue
New Haven, CT 06511 |
|
|
Plaintiff
Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing
|
|
|
Plaintiff
U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Owner Trustee for VRMTG Asset Trust
|
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
Wells Fargo Bank USA Holdings
|
|
|
Plaintiff
VRMTG Asset Trust
|
|
|
Plaintiff
U.S. Bank Trust N.A.
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Joshua Stolowitz
|
|
|
Plaintiff
State of Connecticut
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Baron Silverstein
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Bendett & McHugh, PC
|
|
|
Plaintiff
NewRez LLC
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Dominick Neveux
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Jack Navarro
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Korde & Associates P.C.
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Jeffrey M. Knickerbocker
|
|
|
Plaintiff
John Patrick Fahey
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Andrew Cecere
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Brock and Scott, PLLC
|
|
|
Plaintiff
Matthew F. Bristol
|
| Docket last updated: 7 hours ago |
| Tuesday, November 12, 2024 | ||
| 25 | 25
utility
Case Remanded to State
Tue 11/12 11:20 AM
Case remanded to State Court Judicial District of New Haven. (Bergeson, S) |
|
| Tuesday, October 29, 2024 | ||
| 24 | 24
order
Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Tue 10/29 2:33 PM
ORDER denying as moot3 ,4 Motion for Writ of Intermediate Intervention and Motion for Temporary Injunction. As the Court has concluded it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action and it must be remanded, it denies these motions as moot. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 10/29/2024. (Webb, E) |
|
| 23 | 23
order
Order on Motion to Remand to State Court
Tue 10/29 2:24 PM
ORDER granting18 Motion to Remand. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that, if the Court determines at any time that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, it must dismiss the action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) (stating that, for removed actions, "[i]f at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded."). In order for this Court to exercise subject matter jurisdiction, either (1) the plaintiff must set forth a colorable claim arising under the U.S. Constitution or a federal statute, thus invoking this Court's federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331; or (2) there must be complete diversity of citizenship between the plaintiff and the defendant and the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000 under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. See Da Silva v. Kinsho Int'l Corp. , 229 F.3d 358, 363 (2d Cir. 2000) (identifying the two categories of subject matter jurisdiction). Additionally, if an action is otherwise removable only on the basis of diversity jurisdiction under § 1332, it may not be removed if a defendant is a citizen of the state in which the action was brought. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2). Defendants assert in their notice of removal that the Court may exercise its federal question jurisdiction. See ECF No. 1 at 5 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1331). Here, the complaint--which the Court has obtained from the state court website because Defendants have not included it with their notice of removal--seeks foreclosure of the mortgage, immediate possession of the mortgaged premises, and a deficiency judgment. See Complaint, Case No. NNH-CV22-6126370-S. The complaint thus does not appear to present any federal claims. Defendants suggest that this is not a simple foreclosure case, but rather an action that involves violation of their constitutional rights, including the right to a fair trial. See, e.g. , ECF No. 1 at 6-7. But Defendants' allegations do not demonstrate federal question jurisdiction because "federal jurisdiction exists only when a federal question is presented on the face of the plaintiff's properly pleaded complaint." Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams , 482 U.S. 386, 392 (1987) (emphasis added); see also Einhorn v. Best , No. 10 Civ. 9377 (JSR) (JLC), 2011 WL 1046064, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2011) , report and recommendation adopted , 2011 WL 1046092 (Mar. 21, 2011); Citibank, N.A. v. Swiatkoski , 395 F. Supp. 2d 5, 8-10 (E.D.N.Y. 2005). The Court concludes that it lacks federal question jurisdiction. Although Defendants do not invoke the Court's diversity jurisdiction, the Court notes, for good measure, that the case would not be removable on this ground because Defendant Clayton appears to be domiciled in Connecticut, and is therefore a citizen of the state in which the action is brought. This precludes removal on diversity jurisdiction grounds. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2). Because the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action, it must be remanded. The Clerk is directed to remand the action to Connecticut Superior Court. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 10/29/2024. (Webb, E) |
|
| 22 | 22
order
Order on Motion to Strike
Tue 10/29 2:10 PM
ORDER denying19 Motion to Strike. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), the Court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter. Defendants have not identified any material in Plaintiffs' motion to remand that could properly be stricken. The motion to strike is therefore denied. Consistent with the rule that the filings of pro se parties should be interpreted liberally, however, the Court will consider Defendants' arguments in their motion to strike as arguments asserted against Plaintiffs' motion to remand the case to Connecticut Superior Court. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 10/29/2024. (Webb, E) |
|
|
notice
Judicial Evaluation Program Survey
Wed 10/30 5:25 PM
JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS SURVEY - FOR COUNSEL ONLY: The following link to the confidential survey requires you to log into CM/ECF for SECURITY purposes. Once in CM/ECF you will be prompted for the case number. Although you are receiving this survey through CM/ECF, it is hosted on an independent website called SurveyMonkey. Once in SurveyMonkey, the survey is located in a secure account. The survey is not docketed and it is not sent directly to the judge. To ensure anonymity, completed surveys are held up to 90 days before they are sent to the judge for review. We hope you will take this opportunity to participate, please click on this link: https://ecf.ctd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Dispatch.pl?survey (Bergeson, S) |
||
| Monday, September 30, 2024 | ||
| 21 | 21
respm
Objection
Mon 09/30 11:17 AM
OBJECTION re19 MOTION to Strike18 MOTION to Remand to State Court filed by U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Owner Trustee for VRMTG Asset Trust.(Fahey, John) |
|
|
Att: 1
Memorandum in Support
|
||
| Friday, September 27, 2024 | ||
| 20 | 20
respm
Objection
Fri 09/27 3:20 PM
Objection to the Plaintiff's Motion, filed by Willie Mae Clayton, Brandon Winfree Vaughn, Jonita Terelle Vaughn. (Mendez, D) |
|
| Monday, September 09, 2024 | ||
| 19 | 19
motion
Strike
Tue 09/10 12:34 PM
MOTION to Strike18 MOTION to Remand to State Court , by Willie Mae Clayton. Responses due by 9/30/2024. (Mendez, D) |
|
| Tuesday, September 03, 2024 | ||
| 18 | 18
motion
Remand to State Court
Tue 09/03 3:31 PM
MOTION to Remand to State Court by U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Owner Trustee for VRMTG Asset Trust.Responses due by 9/24/2024(Fahey, John) |
|
|
Att: 1
Memorandum in Support,
|
||
|
Att: 2
Exhibits
|
||
| 17 | 17
misc
Disclosure Statement
Tue 09/03 3:27 PM
Disclosure Statement by U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Owner Trustee for VRMTG Asset Trust identifying Corporate Parent U.S. Bancorp for U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Owner Trustee for VRMTG Asset Trust. (Fahey, John) |
|
| 16 | 16
notice
Notice of Appearance
Tue 09/03 3:23 PM
NOTICE of Appearance by John P. Fahey on behalf of U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Owner Trustee for VRMTG Asset Trust (Fahey, John) |
|
| Monday, August 19, 2024 | ||
| 15 | 15
respm
Objection
Tue 08/20 11:03 AM
OBJECTION re 14 Order filed by Willie Mae Clayton. (Freberg, B) |
|
| Friday, August 09, 2024 | ||
| 14 | 14
order
Order
Fri 08/09 1:49 PM
ORDER. Plaintiffs' deadline to file a motion to remand on the basis of any defect other than lack of subject jurisdiction is September 4, 2024 . 28 U.S.C. section 1447(c). Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 8/9/2024.(Hagemann, E) |
|
| Wednesday, August 07, 2024 | ||
| 13 | 13
cmp
Notice of Removal
Wed 08/07 4:02 PM
NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Willie Mae Clayton from State of Connecticut Superior Court At Judicial District of New Haven, case number NNH-CV-22-6126370-S., filed by Willie Mae Clayton. (Mendez, D) |
|
| Tuesday, August 06, 2024 | ||
| 12 | 12
order
Order
Tue 08/06 4:49 PM
ORDER. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. sec. 1446, a defendant or defendants seeking to remove a civil action from state court must file a "notice of removal signed pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and containing a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal, together with a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon such defendant or defendants in such action." The notice of removal purportedly filed by Defendants Clayton, J. Vaughn, and B. Vaughn, does not contain their signatures, a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal, or the original complaint with which they were served in the state court action that they seek to remove. The Court will take no action on the pending motions until Defendants cure these deficiencies. A proper notice of removal must be filed by August 27, 2024 . Defendants are encouraged to contact the Federal Pro Se Program at nhlegal.org/other-resources for legal advice regarding this case. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 8/6/2024.(Hagemann, E) |
|
| Monday, August 05, 2024 | ||
| 11 | 11
order
Electronic Service Documents
Mon 08/05 4:16 PM
NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES: Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of10 Standing Order on Removed Cases,9 Notice of Option to Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction,8 Standing Protective Order,3 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction,7 Electronic Filing Order,2 Affidavit,4 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction, Dkt. 5 Notice re: Disclosure Statement,6 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, and1 Notice of Removal. Signed by Clerk on 8 5-2024 (Shafer, J.) |
|
| 10 | 10
2
pgs
order
Order
Mon 08/05 4:13 PM
Standing Order on Removed Cases. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 8 5-2024 (Shafer, J.) |
|
| 9 | 9
misc
Notice of Option to Consent to MJ Jurisdiction (intake)
Mon 08/05 4:11 PM
Notice of Option to Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. (Shafer, J.) |
|
| 8 | 8
order
Standing Protective Order (Intake)
Mon 08/05 4:10 PM
Standing Protective Order. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 8 5-2024 (Shafer, J.) |
|
| 7 | 7
order
Electronic Filing Order
Mon 08/05 4:09 PM
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 8 5-2024 (Shafer, J.) |
|
| 6 | 6
1
pgs
order
Order on Pretrial Deadlines
Mon 08/05 4:08 PM
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: amended pleadings due by 10 4-2024 discovery due by 2 4-2025 and dispositive motions due by 3 11-2025 Signed by Clerk on 8 5-2024 (Shafer, J.) |
|
| 5 | 5
notice
Notice re: Disclosure Statement
Mon 08/05 3:38 PM
Notice: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1, a disclosure statement must be filed with a party's first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the Court and must be supplemented if any required information changes during the case. Signed by Clerk on 8/5/2024.(Chartier, A.) |
|
| 4 | 4
motion
Preliminary Injunction
Mon 08/05 3:19 PM
MOTION for Temporary Injunction and Hearing Not by Plaintiff, by Willie Mae Clayton, Brandon Winfree Vaughn, Jonita Terelle Vaughn.Responses due by 8/26/2024 (Chartier, A.) |
|
| 3 | 3
motion
Preliminary Injunction
Mon 08/05 3:17 PM
MOTION for Writ of Immediate Intervention and Application for Temporary Injunction by Willie Mae Clayton, Brandon Winfree Vaughn, Jonita Terelle Vaughn. Responses due by 8/26/2024 (Chartier, A.) |
|
| 2 | 2
misc
Affidavit
Mon 08/05 3:14 PM
Commercial AFFIDAVIT and True Bill of Claim in Equity of Adjudicative Facts, and Memorandum on Pro Se In Support of Rights filed by Willie Mae Clayton, Brandon Winfree Vaughn, Jonita Terelle Vaughn. (Chartier, A.) |
|
| 1 | 1
cmp
Notice of Removal
Mon 08/05 2:52 PM
NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Willie Mae Clayton, Jonita Terrelle Vaughn and Brandon Winfree Vaughn from New Haven Superior Court. Case Number: NNH-CV-22-6126370-S filed by Willie Mae Clayton.(Chartier, A.) |
|
|
misc
Filing Fee Received
Mon 08/05 2:54 PM
Filing fee received from Willie Mae Clayton: $ 405.00, receipt number TBD (Chartier, A.) |
||
|
utility
Add and Terminate Judges
Mon 08/05 4:00 PM
Judge Sarala V. Nagala and Judge Thomas O. Farrish added. (Langello, N) |
||