Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Krug v. Regions Financial Corporation

United States District Court, Middle District of North Carolina

May 11, 2015

ROBERT KRUG, Plaintiff,
v.
REGIONS FINANCIAL CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.

ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE

JOE L. WEBSTER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This matter is before the Court on several motions: Plaintiffs Consent Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint to Join Regions Bank ("RB") as Defendant and Consent to Stay Action as to Regions Financial Corporation ("RFC") and RB Pending Arbitration (Docket Entry 23), Plaintiffs Consent Motion for an Extension of Time to file a Reply to Defendant Trans Union, LLC's ("TU") response to Defendant RFC's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Action (Docket Entry 24), and Defendant RFC's Consent Motion for an Extension of Time to answer Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (Docket Entry 25).

On March 25, 2015, Defendant RFC filed a motion to compel arbitration, and to stay this action as to claims against it pending the completion of that arbitration. (Docket Entry 11.) In his motion for leave to amend the complaint. Plaintiff consents to Defendant RFC's motion to compel, and seeks an order compelling arbitration of his claims and staying this action as to Defendants RFC and RB. At the consent of the parties, the Court will grant Plaintiffs motion for leave to file a second amended complaint, and recommend that this action be stayed as to Defendants RFC and RB pending the completion of arbitration. In its response to Defendant RFC's motion, Defendant TU seeks to have this action stayed against it pending the completion of that arbitration. (Docket Entry 18.) This request is not in the proper form pursuant Local Rule 7.3. Once Defendant TU submits a motion to stay this action against in proper form, the Court will consider it at the appropriate time. As such, Plaintiffs consent motion for an extension of time to file a reply to Defendant RFC's motion to compel is moot. As to Defendant RFC's motion for an extension of time to file an answer to Plaintiffs first amended complaint, this motion is moot. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion (Docket Entry 23) is GRANTED to the extent Plaintiff seeks leave to amend the complaint. Within seven (7) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall file die Second Amended Complaint in substantially the same form as Exhibit A (Docket Entry 23-1).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED tiiat Plaintiffs consent motion (Docket Entry 24) for an extension of time to reply to Defendant TU's response is DENIED as moot.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant RFC's consent motion (Docket Entry 25) for an extension of time to answer Plaintiffs second amended complaint is DENIED as moot.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that arbitration be compelled as to Plaintiffs claims against Defendants RFC and RB, and this action be STAYED as to Plaintiffs claims against Defendants RFC and RB pending the conclusion of the arbitration.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.