Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01542/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01542-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 430
Nature of Suit: Banks and Banking
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Elvin G. Grundy, Jr. and Willie Ruth

Grundy, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV10-1542 PHX DGC

ORDER

On June 25, 2010, Plaintiffs filed their initial complaint in Maricopa County Superior

Court against Defendants JP Morgan Chase Bank, The Bear Stearns Company, EMC

Mortgage Corporation, Aames Funding Corporation, John Vella, Cassieopeia Saicawalo, and

Quality Loan Service Corporation. Doc. 1-1 at 13-46. On July 21, 2010 Defendant Chase

Bank removed the case to this Court on the ground that it raised federal questions. Doc. 1.

As of the date of removal, Chase Bank was the only Defendant that had been served. See

Doc. 1-3 at 1-3. It appears that no Defendant has been served since the time of removal.

On August 12, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction and for

temporary restraining order. Doc. 11. In the motion, Plaintiffs request the Court to enjoin

Defendant Quality Loan Service Corporation from conducting a trustee’s sale of their home

that is scheduled for August 23, 2010. Id. at 2. Plaintiffs did not request expedited

consideration of their motion. 

Because Plaintiffs have not served any Defendants other than Chase Bank, no other

Defendant has received proper notice of their motion for a temporary restraining order and

Case 2:10-cv-01542-DGC Document 15 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

preliminary injunction. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 does not allow a court to issue

a preliminary injunction without notice to the adverse party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a). Rule 65

also does not allow a court to issue a temporary restraining order without notice to the

adverse party unless the party seeking the order presents facts showing immediate injury and

that efforts have been made to give notice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1). Plaintiffs have made

no showing that they have given notice or made any efforts to give notice, and the facts

suggest that they cannot. This case has been pending since June and has been pending before

this Court since July, and yet Plaintiffs have not effected service on any Defendant other than

Chase Bank. This is particularly problematic as to Quality Loan Service Corporation, as it

is that Defendant’s activities that Plaintiffs seek to enjoin. Plaintiffs have not shown that

efforts have been made to give notice to Defendants, have not shown cause for their delay

in serving Defendants, have not requested issuance of a temporary restraining order without

notice, and, even if they have, have not shown cause for the Court to issue such an order

without notice under Rule 65(b)(1). Defendants must receive notice of the complaint and

motion.

The Court will deny Plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and

preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs may re-file the motions with proper and timely notice to

Defendants.

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and temporary

restraining order (Doc. 11) is denied.

DATED this 16th day of August, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-01542-DGC Document 15 Filed 08/16/10 Page 2 of 2