Barefield v. HSBC Holdings, PLC et al, No. 1:2018cv00527 - Document 81 (E.D. Cal. 2019)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER DENYING Ex Parte Motion for Reconsideration of Consolidation of Cases 79 signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 5/3/2019: Motion is DENIED. No further motions on this subject will be entertained. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 DEBORAH BAREFIELD, as Administrator of the Estate of Thomas W. Hatch, 14 15 16 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING EX PARTE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF CONSOLIDATION OF CASES Plaintiff, 12 13 1:18-cv-00527-LJO-JLT v. HSBC HOLDINGS PLC; CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC.; SUMMIT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC., a California Corporation; DOES 1-20, inclusive; (ECF No. 79) Defendants. 17 18 The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. Not only has 19 Plaintiff not provided any basis for reconsideration, see Local Rule 230(j)(3), but her legal arguments 20 are incorrect as a matter of law. First, her unlawful detainer action was not removed properly. The 21 Local Rules of this District clearly require removed cases to be “initiated pursuant to the CM/ECF 22 procedures in the same fashion as any other civil action.” See Local Rule 101, Definition of “Removed 23 Case.” That did not happen here. Second, as the Court explained, even if removal had been effectuated 24 in a procedurally proper manner, this Court would not have jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s removed 25 unlawful detainer action anyway. This Court cannot entertain her unlawful detainer action here and 1 1 therefore cannot consolidate it with her pending action before the undersigned. The motion for 2 reconsideration is DENIED. No further motions on this subject will be entertained. 3 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ May 3, 2019 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.