Foster v. Reliance First Capital, LLC

N.D. Mississippi

Foster v. Reliance First Capital, LLC

DecidedAugust 3, 2020

Docket1:19-cv-00201

StatusUnknown

This text of Foster v. Reliance First Capital, LLC (Foster v. Reliance First Capital, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Mississippi primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Foster v. Reliance First Capital, LLC, (N.D. Miss. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION

MARCUS FOSTER REBECCA FOSTER PLAINTIFF

V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-201-DMB-DAS

RELIANCE FIRST CAPITAL, LLC, DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE INC., MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH, INC., US BANK, NA, GINNIE MAE, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM. DEFENDANT(S)

ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY

There are two motions pending to stay discovery [Dkt 22, 25] pending rulings on the motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. A stay of discovery pending such a motion is not mandatory, but addressed to the discretion of the court. The fact that the plaintiffs have not responded to the motion for stays allows the court to take the motion as confessed. No party has opposed the motions for a stay. Because Rule 12(b)(6) motions are decided on the pleadings, McAlpin v. Am. Hardwoods Indus., LLC, 2016 WL 1084139, at *1 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 17, 2016), the court, not infrequently, decides these motions before allowing discovery to proceed. The court finds that it is appropriate to stay this matter until all pending motions to dismiss [Dkts. 11, 16, 18]. IT IS ORDERED that all discovery in this action shall be stayed pending ruling on the motions to dismiss [Dkt. 11, 16 and 18]. If the motions, or any of them, are not granted in full, the parties are directed to contact the chambers of the magistrate judge to request the setting of a Case management order within fourteen days of the ruling on the motions. SO ORDERED this the 3rd day of August, 2020.

/s/ David A. Sanders U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION

MARCUS FOSTER REBECCA FOSTER PLAINTIFF

V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-201-DMB-DAS

RELIANCE FIRST CAPITAL, LLC, DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE INC., MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH, INC., US BANK, NA, GINNIE MAE, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM. DEFENDANT(S)

ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY

There are two motions pending to stay discovery [Dkt 22, 25] pending rulings on the motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. A stay of discovery pending such a motion is not mandatory, but addressed to the discretion of the court. The fact that the plaintiffs have not responded to the motion for stays allows the court to take the motion as confessed. No party has opposed the motions for a stay. Because Rule 12(b)(6) motions are decided on the pleadings, McAlpin v. Am. Hardwoods Indus., LLC, 2016 WL 1084139, at *1 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 17, 2016), the court, not infrequently, decides these motions before allowing discovery to proceed. The court finds that it is appropriate to stay this matter until all pending motions to dismiss [Dkts. 11, 16, 18]. IT IS ORDERED that all discovery in this action shall be stayed pending ruling on the motions to dismiss [Dkt. 11, 16 and 18]. If the motions, or any of them, are not granted in full, the parties are directed to contact the chambers of the magistrate judge to request the setting of a Case management order within fourteen days of the ruling on the motions. SO ORDERED this the 3rd day of August, 2020.

/s/ David A. Sanders U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Foster v. Reliance First Capital, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foster-v-reliance-first-capital-llc-msnd-2020.