Forbright Bank v. Contour PropCo 1735 S Mission, LLC

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FORBRIGHT BANK f/k/a Congressional Case No.: 23-cv-00931-JAH-NLS Bank, a Maryland chartered bank, 12 ORDER SETTING HEARING ON EX Plaintiff, 13 PARTE APPLICATION (ECF No. 7) v. 14 CONTOUR PROPCO 1735 S MISSION, 15 LLC, a Delaware limited liability 16 company, CONTOUR OPCO 1735 S MISSION, LLC, a Delaware limited 17 liability company, UMB BANK, N.A., a 18 national banking association, ZB, N.A. D/B/A NATIONAL BANK OF 19 ARIZONA, a national banking 20 association, PRO-VIGIL, INC., a Texas corporation, and DOES 1-12, the last 21 twelve names being fictitious and 22 unknown to Plaintiff, the persons or parties intended being the tenants, 23 occupants, persons, or entities, if any, 24 having or claiming an interest in or lien upon the mortgaged premises described in 25 the complaint, 26 Defendants. 27 28 1 Pending before the Court is an Ex Parte Application For An Order Appointing 2 ||Receiver by Plaintiff Forbright Bank f/k/a Congressional Bank, a Maryland chartered 3 ||}commercial bank (“Plaintiff”). (ECF No. 7). Plaintiffs application requests the Court 4 || appoint a receiver, or in the alternative, set an expedited briefing schedule and hearing on 5 instant motion.! Upon review of the application, the Court notes Plaintiff's failure to 6 ||set forth the pertinent legal standard for the appointment of a receiver. See e.g., Canada 7 || Life Assur. Co. v. Lapeter, 563 F.3d 837, 844 (9th Cir. 2009). Despite this deficiency, the 8 || Court finds it appropriate to set a briefing schedule on the instant application. Accordingly, 9 || IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Plaintiff's ex parte application is granted in part and denied 10 part. 11 1. Plaintiff is to file a supplemental brief to their ex parte application, not exceeding 12 ten pages, on or before May 30, 2023, at 12:00 p.m.; 13 2. Defendants Contour PropCo 1735 S Mission, LLC, a Delaware limited liability 14 company, and Contour OpCo 1735 S Mission, LLC (collectively “Defendants’’) 15 shall file a response to Plaintiff's ex parte application, not exceeding ten pages, on 16 or before June 5, 2023, by 12:00 p.m. No reply shall be entertained in the matter. 17 3. The Parties shall appear for a hearing on the application on June 12, 2023, at 10:30 18 a.m. before the Honorable John A. Houston, United States District Judge, in 19 Courtroom 13B, 333 West Broadway, San Diego, California. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 || DATED: May 25, 2023 VU 22 3 J A. HOUSTON YNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 25 26 ! Plaintiff also expresses concern with the removal of this action and the Court’s jurisdiction in this diversity action. The briefing here is limited to Plaintiff's application 27 ||for the appointment of a receiver. Any jurisdictional concerns may be addressed in a 28 motion to remand, subject to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Civil Local Rules, and case law. sy