Arizona Ex Rel. Goddard v. Countrywide Financial Corp.

Good Law
665 F.3d 1165·2012 WL 10966·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 3, 201211-80086California785 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Order; Dissent by Judge GOULD.

*1166 ORDER

Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 27-10.

Respondent’s request that it be awarded its costs, contained in its response to the motion to reconsider, is denied.

No further filings will be accepted in this closed case.

Dissenting Opinion

Gould, J.

dissenting:

I dissent and would grant reconsideration and would permit appeal. We have decisions in different district courts in Nevada and Arizona going in opposite directions on the same or very similar issues. Although we have permitted appeal in Nevada v. Bank of America Corp., No. 11-80165, there are ways in which that decision might be resolved without clarifying the legal points concerning application of the Class Action Fairness Act to parens patriae actions in which an attorney general seeks restitution for state citizens, on which our district courts are divided. In my view, if there is one thing we should readily do as a circuit, it is to take steps to eliminate intra-circuit conflicts in our district courts. A state attorney general should face the same law and orientation of a district court in each of the states within our circuit. To my thinking, it just doesn’t make sense to leave the attorney generals of the various states at sea when we could easily simplify and clarify matters by permitting appeal in both this decision coming from Arizona and the related case in Nevada on which we are allowing an appeal. A panel hearing both appeals on an expedited basis could…

Opinion

FILED

FOR PUBLICATION JAN 03 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

STATE OF ARIZONA, ex rel Terry L. No. 11-80086 Goddard ex rel Thomas C. Horne, D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00131-FJM Plaintiff - Respondent, District of Arizona, Phoenix v.

COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL ORDER

CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation;

COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS

INCORPORATED, a New York corporation; a wholly owned subsidiary of Countrywide Financial Corporation; FULL

SPECTRUM LENDING

INCORPORATED, a California corporation now known as Countrywide Home Loans Incorporated; BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; BANK OFAMERICA NA, a national bank; BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, a foreign limited partnership and subsidiary of Bank of America NA; RECON TRUST COMPANY NA, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America NA; UNKNOWN PARTIES, names as: Black Corporations 1-10,

Defendants - Petitioners. Submitted to a Motions Panel June 29, 2011

Before: CANBY, GOULD, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration is denied. See 9th Cir.…

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.