# IndyMac Venture, LLC v. Mulligan

> District Court, E.D. New York · September 24, 2019

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10303067

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. New York
- **Decided:** September 24, 2019
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10303067

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------X
INDYMAC VENTURE, LLC,
Plaintiff,
ADOPTION ORDER
-against- 2:15-cv-07057 (ADS) (GRB)
THOMAS E. MULLIGAN, RIVERHEAD
BUILDING SUPPLY CORP., and AMERICAN
EXPRESS CENTURION BANK,
Defendants.
--------------------------------------------------------X
SPATT, District Judge:
On December 10, 2015, the Plaintiff commenced this diversity action against
defendants Thomas E. Mulligan, Riverhead Building Supply Corp., and American Express
Centurion Bank (collectively the “Defendants”), pursuant to Article 13 of the New York Real
Property Actions and Proceeding Law, to foreclose a mortgage encumbering 5 Marc Street,
Shelter Island, New York (the “Property”).
On February 13, 2017, the Clerk of the Court certified the Defendants’ default based upon
their failure to answer or otherwise appear in this action.
On November 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed the instant motion for a default judgment.
On November 15, 2018, the Court referred the motion to United States Magistrate Judge
Gary R. Brown for a report and recommendation as to whether the motion should be granted, and
if so, what if any relief should be given.
On August 30, 2019, Judge Brown issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) that
that the motion for default judgment be denied, the amended complaint be dismissed without
1
prejudice due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the Plaintiff be given leave to
amend the amended complaint to cure the jurisdictional deficiencies.
On September 9, 2019, the Plaintiff filed proof of service.
It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have not
filed objections.

As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this Court
has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its
result. See Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1 (E.D.N.Y.
Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections for clear error).
Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. The Court denies the motion for default
judgment and dismisses the amended complaint without prejudice due to lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. The Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint consistent with the R&R no later than
30 days from the issuance of this opinion.

SO ORDERED.
Dated: Central Islip, New York
September 24, 2019

___/s/ Arthur D. Spatt_______
ARTHUR D. SPATT
United States District Judge

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10303067. Public record. Not legal advice.