U.S. Bank National Association v. Mattone
- Andrew Carter
- 1:23-cv-11035
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In U.S. Bank National Association v. Mattone, Judge Carter adopted a recommendation dismissing the claims and cross-claims on specified grounds.
U.S. Bank National Association’s breach-of-guaranty, preliminary-injunction, and unjust-enrichment claims were dismissed under the stated grounds. Michael X. Mattone’s motion to dismiss was granted, and Carl F. Mattone’s cross-claims against Michael X. Mattone were dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
What happened
In U.S. Bank National Association v. Mattone, the court considered a magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning U.S. Bank’s claims against Michael X. Mattone and Carl F. Mattone.
The court adopted the recommendation in full. It granted Michael Mattone’s motion to dismiss; dismissed the breach-of-guaranty claims against both defendants without prejudice under New York’s foreclosure statute; dismissed the preliminary-injunction and unjust-enrichment claims with prejudice for failure to state legally recognizable claims; and dismissed Carl Mattone’s cross-claims against Michael Mattone without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. noted that no objections had been filed, found that the recommendation was well reasoned and supported by the facts and law, adopted it in its entirety, and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF No. 58.
The detailed version
- U.S. Bank National Association v. Mattone · No. 1:23-cv-11035
- Andrew Carter
- Mar. 10, 2025
Background
On May 29, 2024, the court referred a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) to Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses. Her February 21, 2025, Report and Recommendation addressed U.S. Bank’s claims against Michael X. Mattone and Carl F. Mattone, as well as Carl Mattone’s cross-claims against Michael Mattone.
Review of the Recommendation
The Report and Recommendation gave the parties fourteen days to file objections and warned that failing to object would waive objections and prevent appellate review. No objections or requests for additional time were filed. The court therefore found that U.S. Bank had waived its right to object or obtain appellate review. Even so, the court reviewed the complaint, briefs, and recommendation and found the recommendation well reasoned and supported by fact and law.
Disposition
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety:
- Michael Mattone’s motion to dismiss the complaint was granted. - U.S. Bank’s breach-of-guaranty claims against both defendants were dismissed as barred by New York Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law § 1301(3), without prejudice to U.S. Bank’s right to seek to join the guarantors as defendants in the foreclosure action for purposes of seeking a deficiency judgment. - U.S. Bank’s claims for a preliminary injunction and unjust enrichment were dismissed with prejudice for failure to state legally cognizable claims. - Carl Mattone’s cross-claims against Michael Mattone were dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court determined it lacked authority to decide those claims.
The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF No. 58.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.