Zarour v. U.S. Bank, N.A.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided August 9, 2021·No. 1:21-cv-02928·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SIMON ZAROUR, Plaintiff, -against- 21-CV-2928 (LTS) U.S. BANK, N.A., as legal title trustee for the ORDER TO AMEND Truman 2016 SC6 Title Trust; JOHN DOE 1,2,3,4,5,6, Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this new civil action, challenging a 2020 decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. He names as Defendants U.S. Bank, N.A., a creditor in the bankruptcy proceeding, and John Does. Plaintiff paid the filing fee to initiate this action.1 For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Plaintiff 30 days’ leave to file an amended complaint. STANDARD OF REVIEW The Court has the authority to dismiss a complaint, even when the plaintiff has paid the filing fee, if it determines that the action is frivolous, Fitzgerald v. First E. Seventh Tenants Corp., 221 F.3d 362, 363-64 (2d Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (citing Pillay v. INS, 45 F.3d 14, 16-17 (2d Cir. 1995) (per curiam) (holding that Court of Appeals has inherent authority to dismiss frivolous appeal)), that it fails to state a claim, Wachtler v. County of Herkimer, 35 F.3d 77, 82 (2d Cir. 1994), or that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 583 (1999). The Court is obliged, however, to construe pro se pleadings liberally, Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009), and interpret them to raise the “strongest

1 Plaintiff paid the filing fee after then-Chief Judge Colleen McMahon directed Plaintiff to either pay the fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (See ECF 2.) [claims] that they suggest,” Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474-75 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (emphasis in original). BACKGROUND Plaintiff, who is a resident of Rockland County, New York, brings this civil action asserting claims under several federal bankruptcy statutes. He alleges that the events giving rise

to his claims occurred in 2020 at the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Bankruptcy Court). He names as a defendant U.S. Bank, which he identifies as the “legal trustee for the Truman 2016 SC6 Title Trust” (ECF 1, at 5); U.S. Bank is also a creditor in Plaintiff’s bankruptcy proceeding. See In re Zarour, No. 18-22380 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2021). Plaintiff alleges the following, verbatim: [D]efendant fraudulently claims that two lots (20 & 21 are one lot; 22 & 23 are another lot) were part of a mortgage when in fact only lots 22 & 23 were mortgaged. Defendant is and has been attempting to unlawfully obtain a judgment against lots 20 & 21. . . . [Defendant] engaged in fraudulent conduct by: (1) filing a state action on debtor’s lots 20 & 21 that are not part of the mortgage in issue during a bankruptcy stay in violation of federal bankruptcy law (11 U.S.C. § 362); (2) filing a proof of claim by attaching its judgment against lots 22 & 23 only and simultaneously claiming in state court that the debtor’s lots 20 & 21 were part of the mortgage; and (3) filing a motion to lift the bankruptcy stay using its judgment against lots 22 & 23. (ECF 1, at 5.) Plaintiff claims that his “injury is the loss of lots 20 & 21 and the financial damages caused.” (Id. at 6.) Plaintiff seeks an order from this Court “void[ing] any judgment obtained against lots 20 & 21”; he also seeks money damages, including “actual damages under 11 USC § 362(k).” (Id.) According to public records, on March 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed in the Bankruptcy Court, an individual bankruptcy petition. In re Zarour, No. 18-22380 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2021). Plaintiff filed the petition as a Chapter 13 petition, but his attorney, who appeared after the initial filing, moved to convert the petition to a Chapter 11 petition, and the Bankruptcy Court granted the motion. Id. (Doc. 14, 18). Defendant U.S. Bank, a creditor in the bankruptcy proceeding, moved to dismiss the petition, and on February 25, 2021, the Bankruptcy Court granted the motion. Id. (Doc. 164). In its order granting the motion, the Bankruptcy Court noted that the

Court exercised jurisdiction over the matter under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157(a)-(b) and 1334(b), and that the proceeding was “a core proceeding” under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2). Id. Eleven days later, Plaintiff’s lawyer filed a notice of appeal on Plaintiff’s behalf. Id. (Doc. No. 166). DISCUSSION A. Claims arising out of Bankruptcy Court District courts have original jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases and related proceedings. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334(a), (b). “But ‘[e]ach district court may provide that any or all’ bankruptcy cases and related proceedings ‘shall be referred to the bankruptcy judges for the district.’” Wellness Int’l Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, 575 U.S. 665, 670 (2015) (alternation in the original) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 157(a)). Those proceedings, however, must be “core proceedings.” 28

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

Zarour v. U.S. Bank, N.A., (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Zarour v. U.S. Bank, N.A. (Zarour v. U.S. Bank, N.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Heicklin v. Morgenthau
378 F. App'x 1 (Second Circuit, 2010)
Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Younger v. Harris
401 U.S. 37 (Supreme Court, 1971)
Gibson v. Berryhill
411 U.S. 564 (Supreme Court, 1973)
Ruhrgas Ag v. Marathon Oil Co.
526 U.S. 574 (Supreme Court, 1999)
Stern v. Marshall
131 S. Ct. 2594 (Supreme Court, 2011)
Salahuddin v. Cuomo
861 F.2d 40 (Second Circuit, 1988)
Hill v. Curcione
657 F.3d 116 (Second Circuit, 2011)
Wachtler v. County Of Herkimer
35 F.3d 77 (Second Circuit, 1994)
Harris v. Mills
572 F.3d 66 (Second Circuit, 2009)
Wellness Int'l Network, Ltd. v. Sharif
575 U.S. 665 (Supreme Court, 2015)
Cuoco v. Moritsugu
222 F.3d 99 (Second Circuit, 2000)
Sprint Commc'ns, Inc. v. Jacobs
134 S. Ct. 584 (Supreme Court, 2013)