Sundquist
Sundquist v. Bank of America, N.A. (In re Sundquist)
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Klein, J.
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO INTERVENE
The question is whether to permit intervention in this adversary proceeding as either intervention “of right” or “permissive” intervention under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24, as incorporated by Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7024.
The question of intervention arises in the wake of this court’s judgment enjoining the plaintiffs to deliver to the interve-nors a portion of the $45 million punitive damages awarded against Bank of America, N.A. Sundquist v. Bank of America, N.A. (In re Sundquist), 566 B.R. 563 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2017).
The pendency of a motion by Bank of America to alter or amend the findings has forestalled the time in which to appeal.
For the reasons—set forth here, the motion to intervene will be GRANTED on adequate, independent theories of intervention “of right” under Rule 24(a)(2) and *95 “permissive” intervention under Rule 24(c).
Procedural Background
A motion titled Interested Parties’ Motion To Intervene seeking to intervene in this adversary proceeding was filed on May 9,2017. Docket No. 332.
The Interested Parties are the National Consumer Law Center, the National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights…