Chase Bank of Texas, National Association v. Brockman

Full title: CHASE BANK OF TEXAS, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION v. ELLEN BROCKMAN individually…

Court: United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

Date published: Oct 10, 2002

Civil Action No. 02-11253-RWZ (D. Mass. Oct. 10, 2002)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 02-11253-RWZ

October 10, 2002

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER

RYA W. ZOBEL, United States District Judge.

Chase Bank of Texas, National Association ("Chase Bank") filed this action to foreclose a mortgage on property located at 33 Bigelow Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and establish that its mortgage is superior to any other lien, title, or interest in the property. Among the defendants in this case are the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") and the Massachusetts Department of Revenue ("Commonwealth"), which have recorded tax liens against the owner of 33 Bigelow. When Chase Bank brought its lawsuit in state court, the IRS removed the case to this Court, as is the federal government's right under 28 U.S.C. § 1444 and 2410. As a result, the Commonwealth has filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the Eleventh Amendment immunizes it from suit in federal court and that its sovereign immunity mandates dismissal of the entire action under Fed.R.Civ.P. 19(b) for failure to join an indispensable party. The motion is allowed only to the extent that the Commonwealth is dismissed as a party from this lawsuit.

This case does not present a situation in which the Commonwealth's sovereign immunity has been abrogated with "unequivocal statutory language" or waived, so dismissal of the Commonwealth is appropriate.College Sav. Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Educ. Expense Bd., 527 U.S. 666, 670 (1999); Seminole Tribe v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 66 (1996). Nevertheless, there is no need to dismiss the entire action for failure to join an indispensable party. This Court can lessen or avoid any prejudice to the Commonwealth by giving it notice of further proceedings and an opportunity to file briefs as amicus. First Massachusetts Bank v. Daoust, 214 F. Supp.2d 79, 83.-84 (D. Mass. 2002). Moreover, Chase Bank will not have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 19(b).

Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is ALLOWED only to the extent that the Commonwealth is dismissed as a party from this case. The motion is otherwise DENIED.