Free Memorandum in Support of Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 345

Filed 03/25/2004

Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

INDYMAC BANK, F.S.B. Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:00CV835 (CFD)

V.

MOSTAFA REYAD AND WAFA REYAD Defendants DATE: MARCH 24, 2004

DEFENDANT S LEGAL MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATION AND LEAVE TO APPEAL

This is Defendant Mostafa Reyad s legal memorandum in support of Defendant s request for Certification and leave to Appeal. Defendant s request a Certification to the Second Circuit for the determination of liability over Defendant s defense disputing Plaintiff s right to maintain this action, and leave to Appeal.

Defendant raises the issue of Plaintiff s right to maintain this action since August 17, 2001. It is a simple question of law did not Rule upon it by the Court, declaring that Plaintiff has the right or not having that right. The Court Ruled upon the Summary Judgment There is at least a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the Plaintiff had the authority . Defendant provided the Court with

1

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 345

Filed 03/25/2004

Page 2 of 4

evidence supported by legal authority defeats that presumption, followed by motion to dismiss (Doc # 311); pending before the Court.

Defendant is unable to predict when the Court will Rule upon it. Defendant invoked Cal. C. Civ. Proc. 597 to try the issue before the Trial on any other issues of the case see, Memorandum (Doc # 312) at p. 5., Defendant invoked the same provision on the hearing on March 23, 2004 and still unable to predict.

See, Koehler v. Bank of Bermuda, Case No. 96-7066 attachment # 1, attached hereto, at p. 4 of 6 A. Legislative History and Purpose. The House Committee on the Judiciary while considering the proposed section 1292(b) listed several types of cases it thought appropriate for interlocutory appeals . . . (2) where a long trial is envisioned to determine liability over a defense disputing the right to maintain the action.

The issue of Plaintiff s right to maintain the action has been raised by Defendant since August 17, 2001, a question of law not answered definitively yet, raising Defendant s right for immediate Appeal pursuant to Congress authority cited above. However, Defendant s request may harm Defendant, Defendant will be more harmed if this action stay, in addition the question is a simple question of law, but its effect is a very harmful one. It is more judicial if the Court Rule upon it, and the Court s Ruling makes this request moot.

2

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 345

Filed 03/25/2004

Page 3 of 4

CONCLUSION

It is only the Wise Decision of this Court to Rule on the accompanied motion, whatever deems proper.

3

Case 3:00-cv-00835-CFD

Document 345

Filed 03/25/2004

Page 4 of 4

The Defendant Mostafa Reyad

By: Mostafa Reyad 2077 Center Avenue # 22D Fort Lee, NJ 07024 Day Phone # 203-325-4100 Home Phone # 201-585-0562

CERTIFICATION The Undersigned certifies that he mailed a true and correct copy of this Motion to Attorney David Schaefer 271 Whitney Avenue, New Haven, CT 06511 and Wafa Reyad at 2077 Center Avenue # 22D, Fort Lee, NJ 07024.

Mostafa Reyad

4