Summary
holding that the federal government's rights under 28 U.S.C. § 1444 and 2410 do "not present a situation in which the Commonwealth's sovereign immunity has been abrogated with "unequivocal statutory language' or waived"
Summary of this case from Horizon Bank Trust Company v. FlahertyOpinion
Civil Action No. 02-11175-RWZ
October 11, 2002
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Fleet National Bank ("Fleet") brought this action in interpleader to determine the interests of defendants in a surplus of $204,409.89 left over from a foreclosure sale of real property owned by Ronald F. Kaplan. Among the defendants in this case are the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") and the Massachusetts Department of Revenue ("Commonwealth"), which recorded tax liens against Kaplan. When Fleet brought its lawsuit in state court, the IRS removed the case to this Court, as is the federal government's right under 28 U.S.C. § 1444 and 2410. As a result, the Commonwealth has filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the Eleventh Amendment immunizes it from suit in federal court and that its sovereign immunity mandates dismissal of the entire action under Fed.R.Civ.P. 19(b) for failure to join an indispensable party. The motion is allowed only to the extent that the Commonwealth is dismissed as a party from this lawsuit.
This case does not present a situation in which the Commonwealth's sovereign immunity has been abrogated with "unequivocal statutory language" or waived so dismissal of the Commonwealth is appropriate.College Sav. Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Educ. Expense Bd., 527 U.S. 666, 670 (1999); Seminole Tribe v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 66 (1996). Nevertheless, there is no need to dismiss the entire action for failure to join an indispensable party. This Court can lessen or avoid any prejudice to the Commonwealth by giving it notice of further proceedings and an opportunity to file briefs as amicus. First Massachusetts Bank v. Daoust, 214 F. Supp.2d 79, 83-84 (D. Mass. 2002). Moreover, Fleet will not have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 19(b).
Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is ALLOWED only to the extent that the Commonwealth is dismissed as a party from this case. The motion is otherwise