KERR v. BANK TRUST SW 2014 (2018)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Terry KERR; Dennis Kerr, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A., Individually and as Trustee of SW Reo Trust 2014-1; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-16304

Decided: January 25, 2018

Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Terry Kerr, Pro Se Dennis Kerr, Pro Se Thera A. Cooper, Esquire, Akerman LLP, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellee U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. Melanie Dawn Morgan, Esquire, Attorney, Jesse Allen Ransom, Attorney, Akerman LLP, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellee Bank of America, N.A., Darren Brenner, William Habdas, Richard Aaron Chastain Richard J. Reynolds, Esquire, Attorney, Burke Williams & Sorensen LLP, Santa Ana, CA, Michael R. Brooks, Esquire, Managing Senior Counsel, Brooks Hubley, LLP, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendants-Appellees Micheal Brooks, Ramir Mitchell Hernandez, Harmony Title Agency Joseph P. Buchman, Attorney, Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Richard J. Reynolds, Esquire, Attorney, Burke Williams & Sorensen LLP, Santa Ana, CA, Michael R. Brooks, Esquire, Managing Senior Counsel, Brooks Hubley, LLP, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellee Richard J. Reynolds Thera A. Cooper, Esquire, Akerman LLP, Las Vegas, NV, for Amici Curiae

MEMORANDUM **

Terry and Dennis Kerr appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the Kerrs’ action because the Kerrs failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim. See id. at 341-42 (although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (“A pleading that offers ‘labels and conclusions’ or ‘a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action’ ” will not satisfy Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2), “[n]or does a complaint suffice if it tenders ‘naked assertions[s]’ devoid of ‘further factual enhancement.’ ” (citations omitted)).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the Kerrs’ motions for entry of default judgment because the record does not show that defendants were in default. See Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471 (9th Cir. 1986) (setting forth the standard of review).

The motion for leave to file an amicus brief (Docket Entry No. 18), filed by U.S. Bank, N.A., and U.S. Bank, N.A., as Trustee of SW REO Trust 2014-1, is granted. The Clerk shall file the amicus brief at Docket Entry No. 18.

AFFIRMED.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law