Guzzo v. Mason McDuffie Mortgage Co.

Background

Mason McDuffie Mortgage Co. filed a motion under Rule 12(b)(6), which asks the court to dismiss a complaint for failing to state a legally sufficient claim. Libby Guzzo did not oppose that motion. Guzzo separately moved for permission to file a First Amended Complaint and moved to have the removed case sent back to state court.

The court struck Guzzo’s replies concerning those motions because they were filed after the applicable deadline and she gave no explanation for the delay. The court then considered the defendant’s motion and Guzzo’s two motions without holding the scheduled hearing.

Rulings

The court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss and dismissed the complaint because it lacked sufficient factual allegations to state a claim. The court relied on the rule that conclusory statements and bare recitations of legal elements are not enough. Guzzo had acknowledged that the state-court form complaint was limited in its discussion of claims, identification of issues, and statement of facts.

The court granted Guzzo’s motion for leave to file the proposed First Amended Complaint. The court stated that the case was still in its early stages, the proposed amended pleading did not appear futile, and the defendant had not shown cognizable prejudice from the amendment. The proposed pleading added factual detail supporting supplemental state-law claims and omitted the complaint’s only federal claim. Guzzo was directed to file it by March 8, 2024.

The court deferred ruling on Guzzo’s motion to remand because the proposed amended complaint had not yet been filed. The court stated that it would address that motion by March 8, 2024, or on the date Guzzo filed the proposed amended complaint, whichever came first. The order also vacated the hearing.