Preview
CAUSE NO. 22 DCV-295495
THOMASINA A. COLBERT NOLL IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff
VS.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CORPORATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE FREDDIE MAC
SEASONED LOANS STRUCTURED
TRANSACTION TRUST, SERIES 2019-3
SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING,
INC.
Defendants FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS
DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF FILING REMOVAL
On August 9, 2022 Defendants, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, as Trustee
for the Benefit of the Freddie Mac Seasoned Loans Structured Transaction Trust, Series 2019-3
Trustee”) and Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (“SPS”) (both are collectively “Defendants”)
iled the attached Notice of Removal (without exhibits documents previously filed in the
above-styled case) in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas, Houston Division. See attached Exhibit “A”.
Respectfully submitted,
HIRSCH & WESTHEIMER, P.C.
By: /s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.
State Bar No. 00784294
Eric C. Mettenbrink
State Bar No. 24043819
1415 Louisiana, 36 Floor
Houston, Texas 77002-2772
713-220-9182 Telephone
713-223-9319 Facsimile
Email: mhord@hirschwest.com
Email: emettenbrink@hirschwest.com
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
20060161.20220430/4392668.1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this August 9, 2022 , a true and correct copy of the foregoing
document was served as follows:
Robert "Chip" C. Lane
notifications@lanelaw.com
6200 Savoy, Suite 1150
Houston, Texas 77036
Telephone: (713) 595 8200
Facsimile: (713) 595 8201
Via E Service
/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.
20060161.20220430/4392668.1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERNDISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTONDIVISION
EXHIBIT
exhibitsticker.com
THOMASINA A. COLBERT NOLL
A
VS.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE Case4:22
CORPORATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE FREDDIE MAC
SEASONED LOANS STRUCTURED
TRANSACTION TRUST, SERIES 2019
SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING,
INC.
DEFENDANT NOTICE OF REMOVAL
Defendant Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, as Trustee for the Benefit of the
Freddie Mac Seasoned Loans Structured Transaction Trust, Series 2019 3 (“Trustee”) and
Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (“SPS” (both are collectively “Defendants”) through
undersigned counsel, hereby remove this case from the Judicial District Court of Fort Bend
County, Texas, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston
Division. Defendants deny the allegations of the Complaint and the damages contained therein
and file this Notice without waiving any defenses, exceptions, or obligations that may exist in its
favor in state or federal court.
INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF COMMENCEMENT OF ACTION
On or about July 28, 2022 Plaintiff Thomasina A. Colbert Noll (“Plaintiff”)
commenced this action by filing a Petition, Cause N DCV filed in the Judicial
District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas (the “State Court Action”)See Exhibit On July
Plaintiff obtained an ex parte temporary restraining order in the State Court Action. See
Exhibit C efendant filed an answer on August 9 See Exhibit his action is
being removed less than 30 days following service of the Petition filed in the State Court Action
999999.190/4392478.1
and less than 30 days after Defendant appeared in the State Court ActionAccordingly,
removal is timely under 28 U.S.C. §1446(b).
PLEADINGS AND NOTICE TO STATE COURT
True and correct copies of all process and pleadings in the State Court Action are
being filed along with this Notice of Removal. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1446(d), written notice of
this removal is being served on Plaintiff and filed in the State Court Action.
STATEMENT OF STATUTORY BASIS FOR JURISDICTIONAND VENUE
A defendant may remove a civil action if a federal court would have had original
jurisdiction over the case. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C.
§1441(a) because the state court where the State Court Action has been pending is located in this
district. As discussed in more detail below, this action satisfies the statutory requirements for
Federal Question Jurisdiction.
IV. EDERAL QUESTION JURISDICTION
Removal is proper because Plaintiff’s suit involves a federal question. A case
arises under 28 U.S.C. §1331 if “a well pleaded complaint establishes either that federal law
creates the cause of action or that the plaintiff’s right to relief necessarily depends on resolution
of a substantial question of federal law.” Further, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has held
that “[t]he assertion of a claim under a federal statute alone is sufficient to empower the District
Court to assume jurisdiction over the case and determine whether, in fact, the Act does provide
the claimed rights.”
Murphy Bros., Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc., 526 U.S. 344, 347 48 (1999).
28 U.S.C. §§1331, 1441(b); Grable & Sons Metal Prods., Inc. v.Darue Eng’g & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308, 312
(2005).
See Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc., v. McVeigh, 547 U.S. 677, 689 90 (2006).
Holland/Blue Streak v. Barthelemy, 849 F.2d 987, 988 (5th Circ. 1988).
999999.190/4392478.1
Plaintiff has alleged violations of Trust in Lending Act and specifically references
alleged violations of 15 U.S.C. § 1641(g) and 15 U.S.C. § 1640(a)(2)(a) against Defendant
Since Plaintiff’s claims arise under the laws of the United States of America, the United States
District Court has original jurisdiction and removal is appropriate.
This Court should also exercise supplemental jurisdiction over all claims because
they are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or controversy. As
noted by the Supreme Court, “Section 1367(a) is a broad grant of supplement jurisdiction over
other claims within the same case or controversy, as long as the action is one in which the district
courts would have had original jurisdiction.” Accordingly, this Court has jurisdiction based on
Federal Question jurisdiction
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff made a ury demand inthe State Court Action
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant ask the Court to remove this suit to the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, HoustonDivision.
See Complaint at ¶¶
See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allpattah Servs., Inc., 545, 558 (2005).
999999.190/4392478.1
Respectfully submitted,
By:/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.
State Bar No. 00784294
Federal I.D. No. 16035
Eric C. Mettenbrink
State Bar No. 24043819
Federal I.D. No. 569887
HIRSCH & WESTHEIMER, P.C.
Louisiana, Floor
Houston, Texas 77002 2772
Tel 713 / Fax
mail: mhord@hirschwest.com
Email: emettenbrink@hirschwest.com
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
CERTIFICATE SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this th day of August, 2022, a true and correct copy of
Defendants’ Notice of Removal was forwarded as follows:
Robert "Chip" C. Lane
notifications@lanelaw.com
6200 Savoy, Suite 1150
Houston, Texas 77036
Telephone: (713) 595 8200
Facsimile: (713) 595 8201
Via ECF and Email
/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr.
Michael F. Hord Jr.
999999.190/4392478.1
Preview
CAUSE NO. 22 DCV-295495 THOMASINA A. COLBERT NOLL IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff VS. FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE JUDICIAL DISTRICT CORPORATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE FREDDIE MAC SEASONED LOANS STRUCTURED TRANSACTION TRUST, SERIES 2019-3 SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC. Defendants FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF FILING REMOVAL On August 9, 2022 Defendants, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, as Trustee for the Benefit of the Freddie Mac Seasoned Loans Structured Transaction Trust, Series 2019-3 Trustee”) and Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (“SPS”) (both are collectively “Defendants”) iled the attached Notice of Removal (without exhibits documents previously filed in the above-styled case) in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. See attached Exhibit “A”. Respectfully submitted, HIRSCH & WESTHEIMER, P.C. By: /s/ Michael F. Hord Jr. Michael F. Hord Jr. State Bar No. 00784294 Eric C. Mettenbrink State Bar No. 24043819 1415 Louisiana, 36 Floor Houston, Texas 77002-2772 713-220-9182 Telephone 713-223-9319 Facsimile Email: mhord@hirschwest.com Email: emettenbrink@hirschwest.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS 20060161.20220430/4392668.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this August 9, 2022 , a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served as follows: Robert "Chip" C. Lane notifications@lanelaw.com 6200 Savoy, Suite 1150 Houston, Texas 77036 Telephone: (713) 595 8200 Facsimile: (713) 595 8201 Via E Service /s/ Michael F. Hord Jr. Michael F. Hord Jr. 20060161.20220430/4392668.1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERNDISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTONDIVISION EXHIBIT exhibitsticker.com THOMASINA A. COLBERT NOLL A VS. FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE Case4:22 CORPORATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE FREDDIE MAC SEASONED LOANS STRUCTURED TRANSACTION TRUST, SERIES 2019 SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC. DEFENDANT NOTICE OF REMOVAL Defendant Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, as Trustee for the Benefit of the Freddie Mac Seasoned Loans Structured Transaction Trust, Series 2019 3 (“Trustee”) and Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (“SPS” (both are collectively “Defendants”) through undersigned counsel, hereby remove this case from the Judicial District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Defendants deny the allegations of the Complaint and the damages contained therein and file this Notice without waiving any defenses, exceptions, or obligations that may exist in its favor in state or federal court. INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF COMMENCEMENT OF ACTION On or about July 28, 2022 Plaintiff Thomasina A. Colbert Noll (“Plaintiff”) commenced this action by filing a Petition, Cause N DCV filed in the Judicial District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas (the “State Court Action”)See Exhibit On July Plaintiff obtained an ex parte temporary restraining order in the State Court Action. See Exhibit C efendant filed an answer on August 9 See Exhibit his action is being removed less than 30 days following service of the Petition filed in the State Court Action 999999.190/4392478.1 and less than 30 days after Defendant appeared in the State Court ActionAccordingly, removal is timely under 28 U.S.C. §1446(b). PLEADINGS AND NOTICE TO STATE COURT True and correct copies of all process and pleadings in the State Court Action are being filed along with this Notice of Removal. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1446(d), written notice of this removal is being served on Plaintiff and filed in the State Court Action. STATEMENT OF STATUTORY BASIS FOR JURISDICTIONAND VENUE A defendant may remove a civil action if a federal court would have had original jurisdiction over the case. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §1441(a) because the state court where the State Court Action has been pending is located in this district. As discussed in more detail below, this action satisfies the statutory requirements for Federal Question Jurisdiction. IV. EDERAL QUESTION JURISDICTION Removal is proper because Plaintiff’s suit involves a federal question. A case arises under 28 U.S.C. §1331 if “a well pleaded complaint establishes either that federal law creates the cause of action or that the plaintiff’s right to relief necessarily depends on resolution of a substantial question of federal law.” Further, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that “[t]he assertion of a claim under a federal statute alone is sufficient to empower the District Court to assume jurisdiction over the case and determine whether, in fact, the Act does provide the claimed rights.” Murphy Bros., Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc., 526 U.S. 344, 347 48 (1999). 28 U.S.C. §§1331, 1441(b); Grable & Sons Metal Prods., Inc. v.Darue Eng’g & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308, 312 (2005). See Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc., v. McVeigh, 547 U.S. 677, 689 90 (2006). Holland/Blue Streak v. Barthelemy, 849 F.2d 987, 988 (5th Circ. 1988). 999999.190/4392478.1 Plaintiff has alleged violations of Trust in Lending Act and specifically references alleged violations of 15 U.S.C. § 1641(g) and 15 U.S.C. § 1640(a)(2)(a) against Defendant Since Plaintiff’s claims arise under the laws of the United States of America, the United States District Court has original jurisdiction and removal is appropriate. This Court should also exercise supplemental jurisdiction over all claims because they are so related to the federal claims that they form part of the same case or controversy. As noted by the Supreme Court, “Section 1367(a) is a broad grant of supplement jurisdiction over other claims within the same case or controversy, as long as the action is one in which the district courts would have had original jurisdiction.” Accordingly, this Court has jurisdiction based on Federal Question jurisdiction JURY DEMAND Plaintiff made a ury demand inthe State Court Action CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Defendant ask the Court to remove this suit to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, HoustonDivision. See Complaint at ¶¶ See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allpattah Servs., Inc., 545, 558 (2005). 999999.190/4392478.1 Respectfully submitted, By:/s/ Michael F. Hord Jr. Michael F. Hord Jr. State Bar No. 00784294 Federal I.D. No. 16035 Eric C. Mettenbrink State Bar No. 24043819 Federal I.D. No. 569887 HIRSCH & WESTHEIMER, P.C. Louisiana, Floor Houston, Texas 77002 2772 Tel 713 / Fax mail: mhord@hirschwest.com Email: emettenbrink@hirschwest.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT CERTIFICATE SERVICE I hereby certify that on this th day of August, 2022, a true and correct copy of Defendants’ Notice of Removal was forwarded as follows: Robert "Chip" C. Lane notifications@lanelaw.com 6200 Savoy, Suite 1150 Houston, Texas 77036 Telephone: (713) 595 8200 Facsimile: (713) 595 8201 Via ECF and Email /s/ Michael F. Hord Jr. Michael F. Hord Jr. 999999.190/4392478.1