Snider
v.
B.A.C. Home Loans Serv. LP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADONov 3, 2015
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00224-CMA-MJW (D. Colo. Nov. 3, 2015)

Civil Action No. 11-cv-00224-CMA-MJW

11-03-2015

JEANETTE SNIDER and MATTHEW SNIDER, Plaintiffs, v. B.A.C. HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, and CASTLE, MEINHOLD & STAWIARSKI LLC, Defendants.


ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR ORDER ON MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS MOOT

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Order (Doc. # 70.) The instant Motion requests that this Court rule on Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. (Id.)

On September 26, 2011, the Court issued an Order Granting both Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, and dismissed the following claims with prejudice:

(a) Plaintiffs' claim for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq., as alleged against BAC Home Loans Servicing L.P.;
(b) Plaintiffs' claim for violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq., for claims alleged

against Castle Meinhold and Stawiarski under § 2605 and against Castle Meinhold and Stawiarski and BAC Home Loans Servicing L.P. under § 2609;
(c) Plaintiffs' claim for violation of the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601, et seq.; and
(d) Plaintiffs' claim for declaratory judgment against Defendants (that Colorado's non-judicial foreclosure proceedings are unconstitutional).

It also dismissed the following claims without prejudice:
(a) Plaintiffs' claim for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq., as alleged against Defendant Castle Meinhold and Stawiarski LLC.;
(b) Plaintiffs' claim for violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq., for claims alleged against BAC Home Loans Servicing L.P. under § 2605;
(c) Plaintiffs' claim for preliminary injunctive relief to stop third party Freddie Mac's sale of the at-issue property.

Additionally, the Court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the following state law claims, because it dismissed all claims over which it had original jurisdiction:
(a) Plaintiffs' breach of contract;
(b) Plaintiffs' wrongful foreclosure;

(c) Plaintiffs' slander of title;
(d) Plaintiffs' violation of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act;
(e) Plaintiffs' slander of credit;
(f) Plaintiffs' infliction of emotional distress;
(g) Plaintiffs' unfair and deceptive acts and practices in violation of Colorado law; and
(h) Plaintiffs' breach of reinstatement agreements.

(Doc. # 60.) The Court also dismissed the case and issued judgment in favor of Defendants. (Doc. # 61.) Plaintiffs did not file a Motion for reconsideration of the final judgment or attempt to otherwise amend the Complaint, but did appeal the case; however, the Tenth Circuit dismissed the appeal for failure to pay the appellate filing fee. (Doc. # 69.)

The Court's Order dismissing this case inadvertently failed to dismiss Plaintiffs' Partial Motion as moot. However, none of Plaintiffs' claims remain. As such, Plaintiffs' Motion for Order (Doc. # 70) is granted, and Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. # 45) is now hereby dismissed as moot. DATED: November 3, 2015

BY THE COURT:

/s/_________


CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO


United States District Judge