Walters v. The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, National Association et al, No. 7:2018cv00340 - Document 16 (W.D. Va. 2018)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief Judge Michael F. Urbanski on 9/6/2018. (ck)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
DJppr, oFFIcEU,s, ajsr.cok . AT R> OG ,VA FILED IN TH E U N ITED STATE S D ISTRICT COU RT FO R TH E W E STERN D ISTRICT O F W RGIN IA RO AN O C D IW SIO N SEP b5 2gjg BYJu : . ' ' D SE LEN A SH AN N ON W ALTE RS, CivilAction N o.:7:18cv000340 Plaintiff, V. By: M ichaelF.U rbansld TH E BAN K O F N EW YO RK M ELLO N TRU ST COM PAN Y,N A ,c1PL ChiefUnited StatesDistrictJudge . D efendants. M EM O RAN D U M O PIN ION Thisacdon,flled by plaintiffSelena Shannon W altetsagainsttheBank ofN ew Y ork M ellon Tm stCompany,N.A.,andTrusteeSerdcesofVitginia,LiC in theCitcuitCourtfor the CityofRoanoke,concernsthe foreclosureofW altets'sproperty and seeksdeclaratory relief.Defendantsflledanoéceofremovalonltlly13,2018,allegingdiversityjtuisdicdon. Onltzly20,2018,defendantTrusteeServicesofVirginia,LLC ftledamodontodisnaiss pbinéff's.cllimsagainstitwithprejudicepursuanttoRule129$(6)oftheFederalRulesof CivilProcedute.O n August3,2018,W altersflled a nodce ofvoluntary dism issalwithout ptejudiceofherclnim againstdefendantTmsteeSerdcesonly,putsuanttoRule 41(a)(1)(A)(i).1TrusteeServicesobjectstoW alters'szequestfordismissal. Walters v. The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, National Association et al Doc. 16 Rule41(a)(1)(A)(i)providesthataplaindffmayclismissan action withoutcourtordez by ftling anodce ofclismissalbeforethe opposing partyserveseitheran answeroram odon fozsummaryjudgment.lnitsobjecéon,TrusteeSerdcesarguesthatitspendingmodon to 1W altezsdid notrespondto thepenclingm odon to clism issbefore61inghernodceofvoluntaty dism issal. Dockets.Justia.com , CL K dismissasksthe courtto considerdocllm entsreferted to butnotattached to theplaindff's com plaintand,in orderto considerthose docum ents,thecourtm ustconvertthe m odon to amodon forsummaryjudgmentpursuanttoRule12(d).TmsteeServicesinsistsdismissal withoutpzejudicepursuanttoRule41(a)(1)(A)(i)isimproperbecausethecout'tisreqlnitedto treatitsmotiontodisrnissasamodon forsummaryjudgment. TheFourth Circtzithad occasion to considerthisveryatgumentin FinleyLinesJoint ProtecdveBoard v.NorfolkSouthern Co oraéon,109F.3d993(4th Cir.1997).Asin the instantcase,plaindffftled anodceofvoluntarydisnaissalwithoutprejudicepursuanttoRule 41(a)(1)(A)(i)whiletherewasamodontodismisspencling.DefendantNorfollcSouthern m oved to vacate the notice ofvoluntary dismissal,arguing plaindffw asnotendtled to voluntarily dism issthecaseputsuantto Rule41 becauseN orfolk Southetn'sm otion to dismissandsupporéngafhdavitsconsétutedamoéonforsummaryjudgmentputsuantto Rule 12.2Thedistdctcourtagreed,granted N orfolk Southern'sm oéon to vacate the nodce ofvoluntary dismissal,and furthergranted N orfolk Southern'sm odon to clismissand dismissed plaintiff'scllimswith prejudice.109F.3d at994. Onappeal,theFollf-thCircuitreversed,holdingaRule124$(6)modontodisnlissis notconvertedintoamodon fotsummaryjudgmentautomadcallyatthetimeitisserved sim ply becausem attersoutside the pleadingsareattached thereto.ld.at995.Rather,Rule 12(d)plainlygivesthecourtcliscretion to determinewhetherornotto excludematters outside ofthepleadings.1d.at996.Theruleexpressly statesthatam otion to dism iss / 2Thelanguagereferredtoi! zEtl: ILCyasappeaG gitzRule12$)(6)now appearsinRule12(d).Itprovides:Tflf,ona motionmzdezRule126)(6)oz12(c),mattersoutsidethepleadingsarepresentedtoandnotexcludedbythecourqthe modonmustbetzeatedasonefors'lmmaryjudgmentunderRule56.Al1paoesmustbegivenareasonableoppoemity to presentallthe m atedalthatispertinentto them odon.'' 2 supportedbysuchmaterialsshallbetreatedasamodonforsummaryjudgmentolllywhen them aterialsaze ffpresented to and notexcluded by the courti':them ere subnnission of extraneousmaterialsdoesnotitselfconvertaRule12q$(6)modonintooneforsllmmary judgment.1d.at995-96 (citing21JamesW m.Moore,Moore'sFederalPractice! 12.09g31 (2ded.1996)).Thezulealsozeq''itesaco' urttoprovidethepazdeswithnoéceofits intendontotteatamotiontoclismissasonefors'pmmaryjudgmentand <<areasonable opporttznityto presentallthematerialthatispertinenttothemodon.''Fed.R.Civ.P.12(d); Ett7-e-y,109F.3dat995.Thus,<<aRule129$(6)moéontodismisssupportedbyextraneous materialscannotberegarded asoneforsummaryjudgmentuntilthedistrictcourtactsto convertthem odon byindicating itwillnotexclude from itsconsideration ofthe m otion the suppordng extraneousm aterials.''109 F.3d at997.Thecourtzeasoned: Rule41(a)(1)(i)itselfprovidesadefendantwho wishesto Tfavoid waséng time ormoney''and Tfpzeclude future prejudice to its interests''with a sim ple rem edy to preventa plqintifffrom sua s onte disnlissing an acdon without prejudice:tlae defendant can file an answer or move for s'lmmary judgment. If a defendantfails to pursue thisrem edy,itcannotcircumventthe rule sim ply by serving the plaintiffwith a m otion to dism iss, supported by extraneous m aterials.A plaindffconfronted with such aresponseisfreetoitwokeRule41(a)(1)(i). Id.(internalcitationsomitted). Based on the Fourth Cizcuit'sholding in Finle ,the courtwilloverruleTrustee I Serdces'sobjection to plaintiff?srequestfozdisnlissal.W alters'sRule41noticewasfiled beforeTrusteeServicesserved eitheran answerormotion forsummaryjudgment,and W altersisentitled to distnisssua s onte herclnim sagainstTnzstee Serdceswithout ' Preludice. An ordetwillbeentered to thateffect. sxvsuo,oqjo(,luol n /J .rz.ee? ' . M ichaelF.Ur nsld ClliefUnite StatesDistdctludge . ....,..
]]>
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.
