Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Mosey Persico
-
Order | Filed: February 25, 2014 | Entered: February 25, 2014 In Re
Real Property: Foreclosure | New York Western
Order
TEXT ORDER. IT HEREBY IS ORDERED THAT, this case is dismissed without prejudice. SO ORDERED. Issued by William M. Skretny, Chief Judge U.S.D.C. on 2/25/2014. (CLERK TO FOLLOW UP). (CMD)
-
Response | Filed: February 21, 2014 | Entered: February 21, 2014 In Re
Real Property: Foreclosure | New York Western
Reply/Response
REPLY/RESPONSE to re 5 Order to Show Cause,,,,,, PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE T0 COURT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE filed by USA. (Kaufman, Richard)
-
Order | Filed: February 04, 2014 | Entered: February 04, 2014 In Re
Real Property: Foreclosure | New York Western
Order to Show Cause
TEXT ORDER On June 28, 2013, the United States Government filed a notice of removal in this Court with respect to an in rem foreclosure proceeding commenced on May 10, 2013 in County Court for the County of Erie, New York, Index No. 2013-602328. As stated in this Notice of Removal, "the real property involved in the County's action is part of the forfeiture allegation in the criminal case, United States v. Charles Palmer et al., 11-CR-0202," currently pending before this Court.
Counsel for the County of Erie entered a notice of appearance on July 19, 2013. However, neither party has taken any further action since that time. Further, the Government failed to include in its Notice of Removal "a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon such defendant or defendants in [the state court] action" as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) and Local Rule of Civil Procedure 81(a)(3). Although this is not a jurisdictional defect, Osmose Utilities Services, v. Hish, No. 13-CV-310S, 2013 WL 1625408, *4 (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 13, 2013), it nonetheless hampers this Court's ability to determine the appropriate corrective action to take at this time. Accordingly, both parties are ordered to show cause in writing within 30 days of the date of this order why this case should not be either dismissed, either with or without prejudice, or remanded. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (generally, an involuntary dismissal for the failure to prosecute is considered an adjudication on the merits).
SO ORDERED. Issued by William M. Skretny, Chief Judge U.S.D.C. on 2/3/2014. (CMD)
Stay ahead of the curve
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
- Archive of over 450,000 articles
- Database of over 2.1 million cases
- 62,000+ organization-specific pages.
- Daily and real-time news and case alerts on organizations, industries, and customized search queries.
- Significant legal events involving law firms, companies, industries, and government agencies.
- Learn more
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login