Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00891/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-00891-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
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

ISRAEL GARCIA; JESSENIA M.

GARCIA; IVAN A. MADRUENO;

PRISCILLA ANN SALADORES;

KATHLEEN L. CONIAM, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC fka GMAC

MORTGAGE CORPORATION;

EXECUTIVE TRUSTEE SERVICES,

LLC; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.;

RONALD M. HORWITZ;

RESIDENTIAL FUNDING COMPANY

fka RESIDENTIAL FUNDING

CORPORATION; QUALITY LOAN

SERVICE CORPORATION; GMAC

MORTGAGE, LLC, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-0295-PHX-GMS

ORDER

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a) sets forth who may be joined in an action as

plaintiffs:

Persons may join in one action as plaintiffs if: (A) they assert

any right to relief jointly, severally, or in the alternative with

respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or

series of transactions or occurrences; and (B) any question of

law or fact common to all plaintiffs will arise in the action.

Case 2:09-cv-00891-GMS Document 10 Filed 05/04/09 Page 1 of 4
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 -

Similarly, Rule 20(b) sets forth who may be joined in an action as defendants:

Persons . . . may be joined in one action as defendants if: (A)

any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or

in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same

transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences;

and (B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants

will arise in the matter. 

Here, Mr. and Ms. Garcia, Mr. Madrueno, Ms. Saladores, and Ms. Coniam initially

joined together as plaintiffs asserting claims against six defendants and an indeterminate

number of unnamed defendants. (See Dkt. # 1 Pt. 2.) Plaintiffs’ original Complaint was

predicated upon events surrounding three pieces of property owned separately by one or

more of the plaintiffs. Specifically, Mr. and Ms. Garcia’s claims were based upon their

ownership of real property at 6526 South 41st Lane, Phoenix, Arizona 85041; Mr.

Madrueno’s claims were based upon his ownership of real property at 1815 East Pecan Road,

Phoenix, Arizona 85040; and Ms. Saladores and Ms. Coniam’s claims were based upon their

ownership of real property at 8438 North 85th Street, Scottsdale, Arizona 85251. (See id.)

Because parts of the original Complaint violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8,

the Court directed Plaintiffs, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e), to file and

serve a first amended complaint on or before April 27, 2009. On April 24, 2009, Ms.

Saladores and Ms. Coniam filed a First Amended Complaint asserting claims, based on their

Scottsdale property, against only Residential Funding Company, LLC fka Residential

Funding Corporation, Quality Loan Service Corporation, and John Does 1 through 1000.

(Dkt. # 31.) Similarly, on April 27, 2009, Mr. and Ms. Garcia filed a First Amended

Complaint asserting claims, based on their Phoenix property, against only GMAC Mortgage,

LLC fka GMAC Mortgage Corporation, Executive Trustee Services, and John Does 1-1000.

(Dkt. # 36.) Mr. Madreuno did not file or join in an amended complaint. 

It has become apparent that both Plaintiffs and Defendants have been improperly

joined. While there are likely common questions of law and fact between Plaintiffs and

Defendants, joinder is improper because Plaintiffs do not asserts claims “jointly, severally,

Case 2:09-cv-00891-GMS Document 10 Filed 05/04/09 Page 2 of 4
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

- 3 -

or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or

series of transactions or occurrences.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a). Similarly, joinder of

Defendants is improper because Plaintiffs assert no “right to relief . . . against them jointly,

severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction,

occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences.” Id. 20(b).

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 addresses misjoinder of parties and allows the

Court “on its own” to sever an action to address improper joinder. See 7 C. Wright, A.

Miller, & M. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1657, at 428 (2d ed. 1990) (“More

commonly, Rule 21 has been invoked to sever parties improperly joined under Rule 20.”).

Courts have broad discretion to sever under Rule 21. See Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co., 232

F.3d 1271, 1297 (9th Cir. 2000); Maddox v. County of Sacramento, No. 2:06-cv-0072-GEBEFB, 2006 WL 3201078, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2006). 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

21, the Clerk of the Court is directed to sever this action as set forth in the chart below. Case

numbers CV-09-0891-PHX-GMS and CV-09-0899-PHX-GMS have been assigned to

facilitate this severance. 

Case No. CV-09-0295-

PHX-GMS

Plaintiff – Ivan A. Madrueno

Defendants – Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; Ronald M. Horwitz;

John Does 1-1000

Complaint – Dkt. # 1 Pt. 2 at 6-25

Leave Docket entries the same.

Case No. CV-09-0891-

PHX-GMS

Plaintiffs – Israel Garcia; Jessenia M. Garcia

Defendants – GMAC Mortgage, LLC fka GMAC Mortgage

Corporation; Executive Trustee Services, LLC; John Does 1-

1000

Complaint for this case no. – Dkt. # 36

Transfer Dkt. ## 1, 6, 8, 9, 11, 17, 34, 35, 36 to new case no.

Case 2:09-cv-00891-GMS Document 10 Filed 05/04/09 Page 3 of 4
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

- 4 -

Case No. CV-09-0899-

PHX-GMS

Plaintiffs – Priscilla Ann Saladores; Kathleen Coniam

Defendants – Residential Funding Company, LLC fka

residential Funding Corporation; Quality Loan Service

Corporation; John Does 1-1000

Complaint for this case no. – Dkt. # 31

Transfer Dkt. ## 1, 6, 9, 11, 13, 18, 19, 22, 30, 31, 32, 33 to

new case number.

DATED this 4th day of May, 2009.

Case 2:09-cv-00891-GMS Document 10 Filed 05/04/09 Page 4 of 4