ARNOLD v. HOLMES et al
| District Of Columbia District Court | |
| Judge: | Dabney L Friedrich |
| Case #: | 1:25-cv-00390 |
| Nature of Suit | 220 Real Property - Foreclosure |
| Cause | 28:1331(a) Fed. Question: Real Property |
| Case Filed: | Feb 10, 2025 |
| Last checked: Monday Feb 10, 2025 4:08 PM EST |
|
Defendant
PALOMA HOLMES
|
|
|
Defendant
TALLY ROBERTA HOLMES
|
|
|
Plaintiff
ROY ARNOLD
5221 Dix St. NE
Washington, DC 20019 |
| Docket last updated: 02/20/2025 11:59 PM EST |
| Wednesday, February 19, 2025 | ||
|
order
Order on Motion for TRO
Wed 02/19 3:52 PM
MINUTE ORDER. On February 10, 2025, the pro se plaintiff filed his1 Complaint alleging that the defendants are conspiring to engage in fraudulent and unlawful non-judicial foreclosure proceedings on his real property. On February 18, 2025, the plaintiff filed a7 Motion for TRO to enjoin all foreclosure proceedings. The plaintiff alleges that he purchased the disputed property in February 2014; that in 2015 the defendants filed a Notice of Default because the plaintiff was having difficulty making mortgage payments; and that in 2021 the plaintiff signed a promissory note renegotiating the terms of his payments. Mot. at 12 - 13. In July 2023 and July 2024, the plaintiff received further notices and letters requesting payment. This month, the plaintiff allegedly became aware of an upcoming foreclosure sale, on an unspecified date, because a realtor "called him and asked if she c[ould] sell his property before the pending foreclosure sale." Mot. at 3. The plaintiff alleges he will suffer an irreparable injury if the defendants continue to pursue a foreclosure and "eventually institute illegal eviction proceedings." Compl. at 26. A temporary restraining order is "an extraordinary remedy that may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled to such relief." Sherley v. Sebelius , 644 F.3d 388, 392 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (quoting Winter v. NRDC , 555 U.S. 7, 22 (2008)). "The same standard applies to both temporary restraining orders and to preliminary injunctions." Sterling Com. Credit-Michigan, LLC v. Phoenix Indus. I, LLC , 762 F. Supp. 2d 8, 12 (D.D.C. 2011). To prevail, the party seeking relief must make a "clear showing that four factors, taken together, warrant relief: likely success on the merits, likely irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, a balance of the equities in its favor, and accord with the public interest." League of Women Voters of U.S. v. Newby , 838 F.3d 1, 6 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (cleaned up). The plaintiff "bear[s] the burdens of production and persuasion." Qualls v. Rumsfeld , 357 F. Supp. 2d 274, 281 (D.D.C. 2005) (citing Cobell v. Norton , 391 F.3d 251, 258 (D.C. Cir. 2004)). The Court will deny the plaintiff's7 Motion without prejudice because at a minimum, he has not shown that the loss of his property is certain or imminent, and the lack of a likely irreparable injury alone is enough to defeat his TRO motion. See Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v. England , 454 F.3d 290, 297 (D.C. Cir. 2006). The D.C. Circuit "has set a high standard for irreparable injury." Mdewakanton Sioux Indians of Minn. v. Zinke , 255 F. Supp. 3d 48, 52 (D.D.C. 2017) (quoting Chaplaincy , 454 F.3d at 297). "First, the injury must be both certain and great; it must be actual and not theoretical. The moving party must show the injury complained of is of such imminence that there is a clear and present need for equitable relief to prevent irreparable harm. Second, the injury must be beyond remediation." Chaplaincy , 454 F.3d at 297 (cleaned up). Here, although the plaintiff alleges that he may lose his property if a foreclosure sale proceeds, he does not allege that any sale is actually scheduled for a certain date or even certain to occur. See Patriot-BSP City Ctr. II v. U.S. Bank Nat. Ass'n , 715 F. Supp. 2d 91, 95 (D.D.C. 2010); Clarke v. Carrolsburg Square Condo. , No. 23-cv-205 (UNA), 2023 WL 1963890, at *1 (D.D.C. Feb. 9, 2023) (denying TRO where plaintiff provided "no detail regarding the nature, timing, or context as to the foreclosure at issue" and where the plaintiff "only learned of the foreclosure through a random law firm's mailed advertisement for services"). Moreover, the documentation in the Complaint shows that the plaintiff and the defendants have been in communication regarding the pending foreclosure since at least 2023. At least at this stage, absent any evidence that the plaintiff's eviction or loss of property will actually occur on certain date in the near future, the Court cannot say that the plaintiff has shown an imminent irreparable injury. See Chaplaincy , 454 F.3d at 297. Accordingly, the plaintiff's7 Motion for TRO is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this minute order to the plaintiff's address of record. So Ordered by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on February 19, 2025. (lcdlf1) |
||
| Tuesday, February 18, 2025 | ||
| 7 | 7
motion
Temporary Restraining Order
Wed 02/19 1:08 PM
MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by ROY ARNOLD.(mg) |
|
|
Att: 1
Exhibit,
|
||
|
Att: 2
Text of Proposed Order
|
||
| Friday, February 14, 2025 | ||
| 6 | 6
notice
Notice (Other)
Tue 02/18 4:27 PM
NOTICE of Filing by ROY ARNOLD re1 Complaint (mg) |
|
| 5 | 5
service
Summons Returned as to private individual or business
Tue 02/18 4:26 PM
RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. OFFIT/KURMAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW served on 2/14/2025, answer due 3/7/2025; JAMES B. THOMAS served on 2/14/2025, answer due 3/7/2025 (mg) |
|
|
service
Summons Issued
Fri 02/14 10:11 AM
Summons (11) Issued as to ESTATE OF TALLEY R. HOLMES JR., PALOMA HOLMES, TALLY ROBERTA HOLMES, JUNG KIM, LAW FIRM OF PAYNE AND ASSOCIATES, OFFIT/KURMAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW, WILLIAM PAYNE, ROUNDTREE KNOX HUNTER AND PARKER, JAMES B. THOMAS, LEAH WALKER. (zdp) |
||
|
service
Summons Reissued
Fri 02/14 10:12 AM
SUMMONS (1) REISSUED as to TALLY ROBERTA HOLMES (zdp) |
||
| Tuesday, February 11, 2025 | ||
| 4 | 4
cmp
Request for Summons to Issue
Thu 02/13 9:30 AM
REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO ISSUE filed by ROY ARNOLD.(mg) |
|
| 3 | 3
order
.Order
Tue 02/11 11:03 AM
STANDARD ORDER for Civil Cases. See text for details. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the plaintiff's address of record. Signed by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on February 11, 2025. (lcdlf1) |
|
|
order
Order on Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
Tue 02/11 10:58 AM
MINUTE ORDER granting the plaintiff's2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. It is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of Court issue summons as to Talley Roberta Holmes, Paloma Holmes, Darrell Parker, Rountree Knox Hunter and Parker, Jung Kim, James B. Thomas, Leah Walker, Offit Kurman Attorneys at Law, William Payne, and the Law Firm of Payne and Associates. The Clerk of Court is directed to furnish these summons and five copies of the Complaint to the United States Marshal for the purpose of serving the Complaint and summons upon the aforementioned defendants. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the U.S. Marshal serve process forthwith. So Ordered by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on February 11, 2025. (lcdlf1) |
||
| Monday, February 10, 2025 | ||
| 2 | 2
motion
Proceed In Forma Pauperis
Mon 02/10 3:38 PM
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by ROY ARNOLD. (zsl) |
|
| 1 | 1
cmp
Complaint
Mon 02/10 3:37 PM
COMPLAINT against All Defendants with Jury Demand filed by ROY ARNOLD. (Attachment: #1 Exhibit)(zsl) |
|
|
misc
Receipt of Initiating Pleading & IFP Application
Mon 02/10 3:25 PM
Initiating Pleading & IFP Application Received on 02/10/2025. A copy of the docket sheet has been mailed to the address of record for the pro se party. (zsl) |
||
|
misc
Filing Fee Received
Mon 02/10 3:47 PM
Filing fee received: $ 405, receipt number: 209039. (zsl) |
||
|
utility
Case Assigned/Reassigned
Mon 02/10 3:50 PM
Case Assigned to Judge Dabney L. Friedrich. (zsl) |
||
|
service
Summons Not Issued
Mon 02/10 3:51 PM
SUMMONS Not Issued as to All Defendants (zsl) |
||