Mello

Mello v. Great Seneca Financial Corp.

Good Law
526 F. Supp. 2d 1024·2007 WL 4340992·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93985
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaNovember 5, 2007CV 06-6919 PSG (RCx)California2,028 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gutierrez, J.

Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order on Defendant GSFC’s Motion to Strike Plaintiffs State Law Cause of Action (link # 33)

Before this Court is GSFC’s Motion to Strike Plaintiffs State Law Cause of Action. The Court finds the matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; Local R. 7-15.

I. BACKGROUND

Jim Mello (“Mello”) filed a lawsuit against Great Seneca Financial Corp. (“GSFC”) and CIR Law Offices (“CIR”) on October 30, 2006. On December 6, 2006, Mello filed his First Amended Complaint. Then, the Court allowed Mello to file his Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) on July 27, 2007. Mello’s SAC alleges that GSFC attempted to collect on a time-barred debt by causing its attorneys, CIR, to file an action against Mello on May 2, 2006 in Los Angeles Superior Court. (SAC, ¶¶ 30 & 38.) Mello further alleges that “Defendants knew that the alleged evidence they possessed, and were willing or able to obtain during the course of litigation was, and would be insufficient as a matter of law to prove a case at time of trial” and that “Defendants continued to prosecute the Action knowing that the Action had no merit.” (SAC, ¶¶ 33-34.)

Based on GSFC’s debt-collection…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.