The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, recently reversed an order denying a claim for a post-foreclosure sale deficiency judgment, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding from evidence an expert’s testimony and report as to fair market value because the report was dated six days after the foreclosure sale. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. A final judgment of foreclosure in the amount of $2.4 million was entered against the borrower company and its principal. A third party purchased the property at a foreclosure sale for $100. The third…
Posts published by “Maurice Wutscher LLP”
The attorneys of Maurice Wutscher are seasoned business lawyers with substantial experience in business law, financial services litigation and regulatory compliance. They represent consumer and commercial financial services companies, including depository and non-depository mortgage lenders and servicers, as well as mortgage loan investors, financial asset buyers and sellers, loss mitigation companies, third-party debt collectors, and other financial services providers. They have defended scores of putative class actions, have substantial experience in federal appellate court litigation and bring substantial trial and complex bankruptcy experience. They are leaders and influencers in their highly specialized area of law. They serve in leadership positions in industry associations and regularly publish and speak before national audiences.
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida recently held that a mortgage servicer did not have standing to invoke a jury trial waiver in a mortgage when the servicer was not a party to the mortgage.
The California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, recently held that a successful consumer plaintiff was entitled to $185,000 in attorney’s fees and costs, even though she rejected a settlement offer containing an appropriate remedy before she filed suit. In so ruling, the Court held that rejecting the pre-litigation settlement offer was not unreasonable, as the offer required the consumer to agree to a broad release of claims and a confidentiality clause, and especially as the confidentiality provision in particular was unlawful as to the consumer’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1790, et seq. (“Song-Beverly Act”) claims.…
11th Cir. Holds Bank’s Failure to Stop Theft of Deposit Funds Could Constitute ‘Aiding and Abetting’
11th Cir. Holds Bank’s Failure to Stop Theft of Deposit Funds Could Constitute ‘Aiding and Abetting’
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that a noncustomer pleaded sufficient facts to bring state law negligence and fraud causes of action against a bank when a bank customer engaged in the fraud.
The Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, recently held that a mortgagee’s affidavits detailing the due and diligent inquiry it undertook to attempt to personally serve a borrower were sufficient to allow service by publication in a mortgage foreclosure action.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that if a creditor wishes to participate in the distribution of a debtor’s assets under Chapter 13, it must timely file a proof of claim, and the debtor’s acknowledgment of the debt owed to the creditor does not relieve the creditor of this affirmative duty. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. The debtor filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition. The bankruptcy court issued a notice with a deadline for creditors to file a proof of claim. The creditor was sent a copy of the…
The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, recently confirmed that a substituted plaintiff would have to demonstrate its standing to enforce a note and mortgage at the time of trial, and the original plaintiff’s standing at the time the foreclosure complaint was filed. In so ruling, the Court rejected the argument a substituted mortgagee must also prove its standing at the time of a court-ordered substitution. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. A mortgagee filed a foreclosure action asserting two counts: an action to reestablish the note which was allegedly lost or destroyed,…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held that claims of an opt-out class in a previously-settled California state class action that released any existing federal Fair Labor Standards Act claims by mortgage loan officers against lenders that failed to pay them overtime were precluded by res judicata because the previous opt-out state court settlement met due process requirements, and the FLSA did not expressly or impliedly create an exception to the Full Faith and Credit Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1738. A copy of the opinion in Raymond Richardson, et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et…
Applying Campbell-Ewald, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit revived a consumer plaintiff’s ability to proceed with a putative class action, holding that an unaccepted offer of settlement or judgment generally does not moot a case, even if the offer would fully satisfy the plaintiff’s demands for relief.
The Supreme Court of Florida today issued its long-awaited ruling in Bartram v. U.S. Bank, involving when Florida’s five-year mortgage foreclosure statute of limitations is triggered. The Court held that: “[W]ith each subsequent default, the statute of limitations runs from the date of each new default providing the mortgagee the right, but not the obligation, to accelerate all sums then due under the note and mortgage.” A mortgagee is “not precluded by the statute of limitations from filing a subsequent foreclosure action based on payment defaults occurring subsequent to the dismissal of the first foreclosure action, as long as the…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that a mortgage loan servicer violated the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq., by failing to properly respond to the borrowers’ request for information, but because the borrowers failed to provide evidence of damages stemming from the violation, the servicer was entitled to summary judgment. In so ruling, the Court held that the borrowers sufficiently alleged a concrete injury in fact that was fairly traceable to the servicer’s alleged violation of RESPA in order to have standing under Spokeo, but that “[w]hether the allegations…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that the trustee of a California deed of trust securing a real estate loan was not a “debt collector” under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, because the trustee was not attempting to collect money from the borrower. In so ruling, the Court held that “actions taken to facilitate a non-judicial foreclosure, such as sending the notice of default and notice of sale, are not attempts to collect ‘debt’ as that term is defined by the FDCPA.” The Court also vacated the dismissal of the borrower’s federal Truth…