William Lindsay Osteen Sr.

“This court finds that the Bankruptcy Court appropriately found the facts to the extent that this court cannot find them to be clearly erroneous. Accepting the facts as found by that court the conclusions of law, upon de novo review, are proper and should be affirmed.”

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [19] is granted.”

“For the reasons set forth above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [27] pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) is denied.”

“. Because the court will order further briefing on the threshold issue of subject matter jurisdiction, a decision on Defendants' argument that Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted will be held in abeyance.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that both sua, sponte and pursuant to defendant’s motions for sanctions, including dismissal, (docket nos. 13 & 16) this action be, and the same hereby is, dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2)(C) and 41(b).”

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Defendants Curry, Pugh and Laughlin’s motions to dismiss (docket nos. 6, 24, & 26) be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is DENIED as to Count 2, the § 2511 claim, and GRANTED as to Count 3, the § 2512 claim and Count 5 alleging conversion under North Carolina state law.”

“As for Plaintiffs motion to amend the complaint to drop its § 2512 claim and to add three state law claims, Defendants have not opposed the motion, and the time to do so has expired. For this reason, the motion to amend is granted. I note that, in any event, the § 2512 claim will be dismissed if the court adopts this recommendation.”

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Stay, Transfer or Dismiss Pursuant to the First-Filed Rule or, in the Alternative, for an Order to Transfer Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) [6-1, 6-2] is DENIED as moot.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondent’s motion for summary judgment [Pleading No. 4] be GRANTED, that Petitioner’s motion for habeas corpus relief [Pleading No. 1] be DENIED, and that this action be dismissed with prejudice. Finding no substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction, nor a debatable procedural ruling, a certificate of ap-pealability is not issued.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss (docket no. 8) be GRANTED. A judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the petition for habeas corpus (docket no. 1) is denied, that respondent’s motion for summary judgment (docket no. 4) is granted, that petitioner’s motion to grant habe-as corpus (docket no. 10) is denied, that this action is dismissed, and that finding no substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction, nor a debatable procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability is denied.”

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, for the reasons stated herein, that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [2] is DENIED.”

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion to Amend Complaint [8] is DENIED.”

“IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Washington Mutual Bank, FA’s Motion to Dismiss [2] and Defendants Ells and Neill’s Motion to Dismiss [4] are hereby GRANTED without prejudice.”