Stewart v. M&T Mortgage Corporation et al
Filing
24
ORDER granting 13 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Benjamin H. Settle.(cc: Pltf via mail) (MGC)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA
5
6
7
ROGER ALLAN STEWART,
8
Plaintiff,
9
v.
10
M&T MORTGAGE CORPORATION, et al.,
11
CASE NO. C12-5741 BHS
ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
DISMISS
Defendants.
12
13
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Lawyers Title Insurance Company’s
14 (“Lawyers Title”) motion to dismiss (Dkt. 13). The Court has considered the pleadings filed in
15 support of and in opposition to the motion and the remainder of the file and hereby grants the
16 motion for the reasons stated herein.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
17
18
On August 10, 2012, Plaintiff Roger Allan Stewart (“Stewart”) filed a complaint in
Pierce County Superior Court for the State of Washington requesting that the Court quiet title to
19
certain real property. Dkt. 1, Exh. A. On August 21, 2012, Lawyers Title removed the matter to
20
this Court. Dkt. 1.
21
22
ORDER - 1
1
On October 3, 2012, Lawyers Title filed a motion to dismiss based on res judicata. Dkt.
2 13. Lawyers Title claims that
3
4
5
6
This is the fourth frivolous lawsuit filed by Plaintiff concerning real
property located at 10717 State Route 162 E., Puyallup, WA 98374 (“Subject
Property”). The three prior cases were filed in the United States District Court for
the Western District of Washington at Tacoma under Case No. CV-10-5148-RBL,
Case No. CV-10-5884-RBL, and Case No. CV-11-5442-RBL. After dismissing
frivolous claims in all three of these matters, Judge Leighton entered an Order on
August 30, 2011, warning Plaintiff “any future frivolous filings by Mr. Stewart on
the subjects of this lawsuit may result in the imposition of sanctions.” (Dkt. No 13
– ORDER filed under Case No. CV-11-5442-RBL).
7
Id. at 1–2. On October 19, 2012, Stewart responded. Dkt. 13. On October 24, 2012, Lawyers
8
Title replied. Dkt. 19.
9
10
II. DISCUSSION
Motions to dismiss brought under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
11 may be based on either the lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence of sufficient facts
12 alleged under such a theory. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th
13 Cir. 1990). Material allegations are taken as admitted and the complaint is construed in the
14 plaintiff's favor. Keniston v. Roberts, 717 F.2d 1295, 1301 (9th Cir. 1983). To survive a motion
15 to dismiss, the complaint does not require detailed factual allegations but must provide the
16
17
grounds for entitlement to relief and not merely a “formulaic recitation” of the elements of a
cause of action. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965 (2007). Plaintiffs must
allege “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 1974. In the
18
event the court finds that dismissal is warranted, the court should grant the plaintiff leave to
19
amend unless amendment would be futile. Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d
20
21
1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2003).
Quiet title actions are “designed to resolve competing claims of ownership . . . [or]
22
ORDER - 2
1 the right to possession of real property.” Kobza v. Tripp, 105 Wn.App. 90, 95 (2001).
2 Washington’s statute governing quiet title actions recognizes that a deed of trust creates only a
3 secured lien on real property, and does not convey any ownership interest or right to possess the
4
5
subject property. RCW 7.28.230(1).
In this case, Stewart requests that the Court quiet title in his name to property that has
already been foreclosed upon. Stewart has failed to show that he has, or will ever have, a
6
competing claim to ownership in the property in question. Therefore, the Court grants Lawyers
7
Title’s motion to dismiss. The Court dismisses the complaint with prejudice against all parties
8
because any amendment would be futile.
9
10
III. ORDER
Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that Lawyers Title’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. 13) is
11 GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to remove all pending motions from the Court’s calendar and
12 close this case.
13
Dated this 6th day of November, 2012.
14
A
15
16
BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge
17
18
19
20
21
22
ORDER - 3
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
