Federal Courts Power Over State Court

7/30/2019 Federal Courts Power Over State Court

1/8

UNI TED STATES DI STRI CT COURTMI DDLE DI STRI CT OF FLORI DA

TAMPA DI VI SI ONDAVI D LEE TERMARSCH,

Pl ai nt i f f ,

v. CASE NO. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW

STATE OF MI CHI GAN, 71ADI STRI CT COURT, et al . ,

Def endants.

_________________________/

ORDER

Thi s cause i s bef or e t he Cour t on al l pendi ng mot i ons.

Pl ai nt i f f Davi d Lee Ter Mar sch i s pr oceedi ng pr o se i n t hi s

case.

The Compl ai nt i n t hi s st at es t hat t hi s case i s brought under

t he f ol l owi ng: 28 U. S. C. Sec. 1331, 28 U. S. C. Sec. 1346, 28

U. S. C. Sec. 1361, Ar t i cl e 1, Sect i on 8, Cl ause 17 of t he U. S.

Const i t ut i on, t he Four t h Amendment , 42 U. S. C. Sec. 1983, 28

U. S. C. Sec. 1343( a) ( 3) ; and 28 U. S. C. Sec. 1333( a) .

Wi t hi n t he Compl ai nt ( pp. 3- 4) , Pl ai nt i f f Ter Mar sch has

named the f ol l owi ng par t i es as def endant s:

71 A Di st r i ct Cour t Lapeer Count y;

Laur a Cheger Bar nar d, sued i n her of f i ci al capaci t y asj udge;

Fabr i zi o & Br ooke, P. C. , of Tr oy, Mi chi gan;


2/8

Case No. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW

2

Mar c P. J er abek, i n of f i ci al capaci t y as agent / at t or neyf or Fabr i zi o & Br ook, P. C.

Deut sche Bank Nat i onal Trust Company, Trust ee

J ohn and/ or Mar y Doe, i n of f i ci al capaci t y as Tr ust ee andAdmi ni st r at i ve Agent of Deut sche Bank

Wayne Lee, and/ or successor , i n of f i ci al capaci t y as CEOagent f or Deut sche Bank

New Cent ury Mor t gage Cor por at i on

Br ad A. Mor r i ce, i n of f i ci al capaci t y as CEO f orNew Cent ury Mor t gage Cor por at i on

Rober t J . Kl ei ne, i n of f i ci al capaci t y as Comt r ol l er ( si c)of St at e of Mi chi gan

The Cour t not es t hat t he st yl e of t he Compl ai nt i ncl udes t he

f ol l owi ng addi t i onal par t i es as Def endant s:

St at e of Mi chi ganHomeq Servi ci ng Corporat i onAr t Lyon, Pr esi dentLapeer Count y Sher i f f Of f i ce

Ronal d J . Kal anqui n, Sher i f fLaPeer Count y Cl er ks Of f i ce

The Compl ai nt ( Dkt . 1) i n t hi s case i ncl udes t he f ol l owi ngCounts:

Count I, as t o al l Def endant s, f or Trespass on Case;

Count II, as t o Deut sche Bank, Homeq Servi ci ng Corporat i on,Febr i zi o & Br ooke, PC, and Mar k J er abek, f or Tr espass onCase, and vi ol at i ons of Fai r Debt Col l ect i on Pr act i ces Act ;

Count III, as t o Laur a Cheger Bar nar d, f or exceedi ngj ur i sdi ct i on;


3/8

Case No. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW

3

Count IV, as t o Laur a Cheger Bar nar d, al l egi ng vi ol at i on ofdue pr ocess by pr ocedur es i n whi ch Pl ai nt i f f was f ound i ncont empt of cour t and r emoved f r om cour t , and vi ol at i on of

oat h of of f i ce, commi t t i ng a t r espass and exceedi ng J udgeBar nar d s j ur i sdi cti on i n r emovi ng Pl ai nt i f f s f ami l y f r omt he pr emi ses at 4200 Phi l l i ps Rd. , Met amor a, Mi chi gan,48455;

Count V, as t o New Cent ur y Mort gage, f or not havi ng al i cense, and f or i nt ent t o def r aud and ext or t pr oper t y f r omPl ai nt i f f , f or commi t t i ng f r aud by conceal ment , f r aud bymi sr epr esent at i on, f or obt ai ni ng Pl ai nt i f f s money bydecept i ve busi ness pr act i ces, Tr espass;

Count VI, as t o Lapeer Count y Sher i f f s Of f i ce, Ronal d J .Kal anqui n, al l egat i ons t hat Pl ai nt i f f gave t hem not i ce ofa RI CO case, but t he Mi chi gan Hi ghway Pat r ol came andr emoved Pl ai nt i f f s f ami l y f r om t he pr oper t y; vi ol at i on ofoat h of of f i ce and a t r espass; not i f i cat i on t o Ni ck N.Hol owkawas of RI CO case, no st ay mot i on made and t ol dof f i cer s t o r emove Pl ai nt i f f s f ami l y f r om t he pr emi ses.

Count VII, as t o Laur a Cheger Bar nar d, obj ect i on t opr ocedur e to J udge Bar nard i n r esol vi ng cont empt i ssue;compl ai nt t hat J udge Bar nar d exceeded her j ur i sdi ct i on andt r espassed agai nst Pl ai nt i f f ;

Count VIII, di r ect ed t o al l Def endant s, compl ai ni ng of manydi f f er ent vi ol at i ons i n Mi chi gan St at e cour t case,compl ai ni ng of l ack of j ur i sdi ct i on i n Mi chi gan st at e cour tand l ack of qual i f i cat i ons under Feder al Const i t ut i on andConst i t ut i on of Mi chi gan;

Count IX, di r ect ed t o al l Def endant s, seeki ng sanct i onsDef endant s and t hat t he pr oper t y l ocat ed at 4200 Phi l l i psRd. , Met amor a, Mi chi gan, 48455, be r est or ed t o Pl ai nt i f fwi t h f r ee and cl ear t i t l e.

Pl ai nt i f f i ncl udes not i ce t o t hi s Cour t of const i t ut i onal ,RI CO, st at ut e and code vi ol at i ons, and not i ce of vi ol at i onof copyr i ght l aws.


4/8

Case No. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW

4

For r el i ef , Pl ai nt i f f Davi d Lee Ter Mar sch seeks an

i nj unct i on st ayi ng Case Number 07- 2487- LT i n the Mi chi gan St at e

Cour t , t o cease any f ur t her pr osecut i on of t hat case unt i l Case

No. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW i s adj udi cat ed, t he ent r y of sanct i ons

agai nst Def endant s counsel , t he r et ur n of Pl ai nt i f f s pr oper t y,

and a j udgment agai nst each Def endant f or general damages i n t he

amount of $6, 000, 000, i nt er est and cost s.

The Cour t not es t hat Pl ai nt i f f TerMar sch has f i l ed ot her

cases i n t hi s di st r i ct . Case No. 8: 07- CV- 1725- 30TBM, Davi d L.

TerMar sch v. Ar gent Mor t gage Company, LLC, et al . , was di smi ssed

f or l ack of subj ect mat t er j ur i sdi ct i on pur suant t o t he Rooker -

Fel dman doct r i ne. I n t hat case, Def endant s pr ovi ded t he docket

sheet of ot her pr oceedi ngs, i ncl udi ng a copy of t he compl ai nt and

or der f i l ed i n t he mor t gage f or ecl osur e act i on agai nst Pl ai nt i f f ,

f or t he pur pose of j udi ci al not i ce. J udge Moody f ound t hat t he

i ssues r ai sed i n t hat compl ai nt wer e i next r i cabl y i nt er t wi ned

wi t h t he st at e cour t s j udgement , such t hat Pl ai nt i f f ef f ect i vel y

asked t he Cour t t o i nval i dat e t he st at e cour t j udgment . J udge

Moody not i f i ed Pl ai nt i f f t hat any r el i ef Pl ai nt i f f seeks must

come f r om t he cour t t hat ent ered t he under l yi ng j udgment . J udge

Moody al so not ed t hat venue was i mproper .

I n Case No. 8: 07- CV- 1580- T- 24TBM, Davi d L. Ter Marsch v. New

Cent ur y Mor t gage Cor por at i on, t he Cour t di smi ssed t he case

wi t hout pr ej udi ce f or i mpr oper venue.

The Cour t f ur t her not es t hat Pl ai nt i f f f i l ed sui t i n t he

U. S. Di st r i ct Cour t i n t he East er n Di st r i ct of Mi chi gan, Case No.

2: 06- CV- 12514- PJ D- PJ K ( E. D. Mi ch. 2006) , and Case No. 2: 05- CV-

75137- PJ D- PJ K ( E. D. Mi ch. 2006) , bot h of whi ch were di smi ssed


5/8

Case No. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW

5

pur suant t o Rul e 12( b) ( 6) .

I . Pendi ng Mot i ons

A. Rooker - Fel dman Doct r i ne

Feder al cour t s l ack j ur i sdi ct i on t o r evi ew t he f i nal

j udgment s of st at e cour t s i f t he f ol l owi ng cr i t er i a ar e met :

1) t he par t y i n f eder al cour t i s t he same ast he par t y i n st at e cour t ; 2) t he pr i or st at ecour t r ul i ng was f i nal or a concl usi vej udgment on t he mer i t s; 3) t he par t y seeki ngr el i ef i n f eder al cour t had a r easonabl eoppor t uni t y t o r ai se i t s f eder al cl ai ms i nt he st at e cour t pr oceedi ngs; and 4) t he i ssuebef or e t he f eder al cour t was ei t heradj udi cat ed by the st at e cour t or wasi nexect r i cabl y i nt er t wi ned wi t h t he st at ecour t s j udgment .

See Amos v. Gl ynn County Bd. Of Tax Assessors, 347 F. 3d 1249,

1265 n. 5 ( 11t h Ci r . 2003) . A f eder al cl ai m i s i nt er t wi ned wi t h

t he st at e cour t s j udgment i f t he f eder al cl ai m succeeds onl y to

t he extent t hat t he st at e cour t wr ongl y deci ded t he i ssues bef or e

i t . See Si egel v. LePor e, 234 F. 3d 1163, 1172 ( 11t h Ci r . 2000) .

I f a f eder al cl ai m i s i next r i cabl y i nt er t wi ned wi t h t he st at e

cour t s j udgment , t he doct r i ne does not appl y i f t her e was no

r easonabl e oppor t uni t y t o r ai se t he f eder al cl ai m i n t he st at e

cour t pr oceedi ngs. A f eder al cour t may ent er t ai n a col l at er al

at t ack on a st at e cour t j udgment whi ch i s al l eged to have been

pr ocur ed thr ough f r aud, decept i on, acci dent or mi st ake. See I n Re

Sun Val l ey Foods Co. , 801 F. 2d 186, 189 ( 6t h Ci r . 1986) .


6/8

Case No. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW

6

I n t he Compl ai nt , Pl ai nt i f f Ter Mar sch al l eges t hat hi s

f ami l y was evi ct ed f r om t he pr emi ses. Fur t her , anot her case

based on t he same under l yi ng f act s has been di smi ssed on t he

basi s of t he Rooker - Fel dman doct r i ne. Based on t he r ecor ds of

t he st at e cour t pr oceedi ng f i l ed i n Case No. 8: 07- CV- 1725- T-

30TBM, t he Cour t concl udes t hat t he j udgment i n t he rel at ed

mor t gage f or ecl osure pr oceedi ngs i n st at e cour t has become f i nal .

Pl ai nt i f f Ter mar sch i s pur sui ng var i ous cl ai ms i n t hi s case.

The Cour t does not compl et el y under st and Pl ai nt i f f s al l egat i ons;

however , i t i s cl ear t hat t he al l egat i ons of t he Compl ai nt ar e

cl osel y r el at ed t o the mor t gage f or ecl osur e pr oceedi ngs on t he

pr emi ses at 4200 Phi l l i ps Rd. , Met amor a, Mi chi gan, 48455. Af t er

consi der i ng t he r el i ef sought by Pl ai nt i f f , whi ch i ncl udes a st ay

of st at e cour t pr oceedi ngs, and r est or at i on of Pl ai nt i f f s

pr oper t y, as wel l as a cl ai m f or money damages, t he Cour t f i nds

t hat t hi s case i s i next r i cabl y i nt er t wi ned wi t h t he mor t gage

f or ecl osur e pr oceedi ngs i n Mi chi gan st at e cour t . The Cour t has

no choi ce, and must di smi ss t he Compl ai nt due t o l ack of subj ect

mat t er j ur i sdi ct i on, based on t he Rooker - Fel dman doct r i ne. The

Cour t grants Def endant s Mot i on to Di smi ss ( Dkt . 41) .

B. El event h Amendment I mmuni t y

Def endant Kl ei n, and St ate of Mi chi gan move to di smi ss

on t he basi s of El event h Amendment i mmuni t y. I n t he Compl ai nt ,

Pl ai nt i f f seeks money damages agai nst Def endant s Kl ei n and t heSt at e of Mi chi gan. The Cour t t her ef or e grants Def endant s Mot i on

t o Di smi ss ( Dkt . 44) .


7/8

Case No. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW

7

C. I mproper Venue

Pl ai nt i f f s Compl ai nt i ncl udes j ur i sdi ct i onal al l egat i ons

whi ch ar e based on f eder al quest i on j ur i sdi ct i on, as wel l as

ot her bases f or j ur i sdi ct i on. Wher e an act i on i s not based on

di ver si t y, venue i s pr oper onl y i n: 1) a di st r i ct i n whi ch any

def endant r i ses, i f al l def endant s r esi de i n t he same st at e, 2) a

di st r i ct i n whi ch a subst ant i al par t of t he event s or omi ssi ons

gi vi ng r i se t o t he cl ai m occur r ed or a subst ant i al par t of t he

pr oper t y t hat i s subj ect t o t he act i on i s si t uat ed; or 3) a

di st r i ct i n whi ch any def endant may be f ound, i f t her e i s no

di st r i ct i n whi ch t he act i on may ot her wi se be br ought . See 28

U. S. C. Sec. 1391( b) . Ther ef or e, i f t he Cour t di d not di smi ss

t hi s case f or l ack of subj ect mat t er j ur i sdi ct i on under t he

Rooker - Fel dman doct r i ne, t he Cour t woul d di smi ss t hi s case f or

i mproper venue.

D. Dkt . 31 Mot i on f or Def aul t J udgment agai nst Deut sche BankNat i onal Trust Company, Set h Waugh, J ohn/ Mary Doe

Def endants Deut sche Bank Nat i onal Trust Company, and Set h

Waugh have moved t o quash ser vi ce and t o di smi ss f or i nsuf f i ci ent

pr ocess and servi ce of pr ocess ( Dkt s. 30, 47) . The Cour t

t her ef or e denies t he Mot i on f or Def aul t J udgment ( Dkt . 31) .

E. Dkt . 49 Mot i on f or Ent r y of Cl er k s Def aul t ( Br uns, 71ADi st r i ct Cour t , Bar nar d)

Dkt . 50 Mot i on f or Ent r y of Cl er k s Def aul t ( Lapeer Count y

Sher i f f s Of f i ce, Kal anqui n)

Def endant s Br uns, 71A Di st r i ct Cour t , Bar nard, Lapeer Count y

Sher i f f s Of f i ce and Ronal d J . Kal anqui n have moved t o di smi ss

t he Compl ai nt ( Dkt . 41) . The ent r y of a Cl er k s Def aul t i s not


8/8

Case No. 8: 09- CV- 1829- T- 17TGW

8

appr opr i at e. The Cour t t her ef or e denies t he Mot i ons f or Ent r y of

Cl er k s Def aul t .

F. Ot her Pendi ng Mot i ons

The Cour t deni es t he ot her pendi ng mot i ons as moot : Dkt . 30,

Dkt . 36, Dkt . 40, Dkt . 47, Dkt . 48, Dkt . 53.

DONE and ORDERED i n Chamber s, i n Tampa, Fl or i da on t hi s

7t h day of J anuary, 2010.

8Copi est o:

Al lpar t i es and counsel of r ecor d

Federal Courts Power Over State Court

Documents

Transcript of Federal Courts Power Over State Court