RICHMOND, Va. — A Virginia federal judge on July 9 granted dismissal of claims asserted by a borrower against lenders and loan servicers with leave to amend, holding that the claims were vague and failed to allege required facts (Darlene J. Davis v. Specialized Loan Servicing LLC, et al., No. 3:17-cv-787, E.D. Va., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114042).
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A New Mexico federal judge on July 6 granted a motion filed by property owners to amend their complaint to add new defendants named in a third-party complaint and to drop their claim for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) (Bob Crabtree, et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 18-cv-0377, D. N.M., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112365).
RICHMOND, Va. — After holding that a mortgage-servicing company failed to submit “fact-specific” evidence showing that a former employee’s alleged misappropriation of trade secrets to another entity that hired her proximately caused its revenue to decline, the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 3 affirmed a summary judgment ruling that the information did not contain trade secrets (360 Mortgage Group, LLC v. Home Point Financial Corporation, et al., No. 17-1014, 4th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18158).
NEW YORK — After finding that a borrower’s claims for violation of federal mortgage law and other causes of action were part of his bankruptcy estate, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 6 affirmed a district court’s ruling that he lacked standing to assert claims against a loan servicer (In re: Alman Andrew Beckford v. Bayview Loan Servicing LLC, No. 17-2865, 2nd Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18368).
ST LOUIS — The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 3 affirmed an award of fees for a lender in the amount of $83,122.95 incurred to collect on its secured debt in the course of bankruptcy proceedings filed by borrowers who obtained more than $20 million for a residential development (In re: Stephen D. McCormick, et al., No. 17-2192, 8th Cir. 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 18151).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A California federal judge on July 2 granted summary judgment in favor of a loan servicer and trustee on claims including violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), holding that the borrower failed to show that a deed was fraudulent (John C. Torres v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC, et al., No. 17-1527, C.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111277).
PHILADELPHIA — The city of Philadelphia on June 29 filed its opposition to a bank’s motion to compel discovery related to loans allegedly issued using discriminatory lending practices targeted at the city’s African-American and Latino borrowers, arguing that the information sought relates to a pre-complaint analysis by non-testifying experts that lacks merit and is irrelevant (Philadelphia v. Wells Fargo & Co., et al., No. 17-2203, E.D. Pa.).
SAN FRANCISCO — After finding that a statute of limitations on foreclosure in Arizona was tolled when a borrower acknowledged the debt, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 28 affirmed a summary judgment ruling for a trustee, holding that it was entitled to foreclose (Katrina Perkins Steinberger, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, et al., No. 17-15314, 9th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 17792).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 28 granted certiorari in an action commenced by a borrower against a bank and a law firm, agreeing to review whether the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) applies to nonjudicial foreclosure actions (Dennis Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LLP, No. 17-1307, U.S. Sup.).
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — After holding that there is no common-law right of access to discovery, a Florida federal judge on June 25 denied a request by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to unseal discovery materials submitted by loan servicers in a lawsuit in which the CFPB alleges that the servicers violated federal consumer financial protection laws in relation to the servicing of loans (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Ocwen Financial Corporation, et al., No. 9:17-CV-80495, S.D. Fla., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105620).
ATLANTA — The 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 21 reversed a district court’s decision to dismiss a borrower’s claim for violation of the Real Estate Settlement Practices Act (RESPA) related to the handling of her loan modification application, holding that she did not need to allege the existence of a valid agreement between her and the bank to assert a RESPA claim (Karen C. Yeh Ho v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 17-11918, 11th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 16758).
RENO, Nev. — After relying on a ruling by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that held that a Nevada housing statute related to homeowners association foreclosures is unconstitutional, a Nevada federal judge on June 19 granted summary judgment for a bank that held a note before the foreclosure of a property (U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Renovista Ridge Master Property Owners Association, et al., No. 3:17-cv-00283, D. Nev., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102500).
SANTA ANA, Calif. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 19 affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a borrower’s claims for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and the California Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR), holding that she failed to allege that the practices of lenders were unfair or unlawful and that she challenged a foreclosure that had not yet occurred (Diane Weinsheimer v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc., et al., No. 16-56725, 9th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 16511).
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A Tennessee federal judge on June 18 rejected a borrower’s objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation that her foreclosure-related claims be dismissed, holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction and that the case was barred by rulings in two previous lawsuits (Ralinda Brooks, et al. v. First Franklin Financial Corp., No. 3:17-00953, M.D. Tenn., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101604).
TRENTON, N.J. — A New Jersey appeals court on June 15 ruled that a bank’s original foreclosure case, which was voluntarily dismissed, did not begin to run a statute of limitations, rejecting a borrower’s argument that the foreclosure action was time-barred (Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, ex rel. v. Michael Hochmeyer, et al., No. A-4714-16T3, N.J. Super., App. Div., 2018 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1402).
PASADENA, Calif. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 18 affirmed a district court’s decision to grant judgment on the pleadings for lenders and a loan servicer, holding that her claims were barred by a two-year statute of limitations and that she had no viable claim for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) (Pamela Rae v. Bank of America, N.A., et al., No. 17-55283, 9th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 16344).
PITTSBURGH — A mental health therapist cannot testify as an expert about whether the conduct of mortgage companies caused a man’s depression and anxiety because she admittedly based her opinions on just talking to the man as a friend she had met online, not as a licensed counselor, a Pennsylvania federal judge held June 12 (Francis Vilkofsky, Jr. v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, et al., No. 2:16-cv-01291, W.D. Pa., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97875).
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on June 11 granted a bank’s motion to dismiss a borrower’s claim for violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) for failure to state a claim, but allowed most of her claims to proceed, including a cause of action for breach of California’s Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR) (Ursula Ogamba v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 2:17-cv-01754, E.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97803).
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal magistrate judge on June 7 dismissed a borrower’s claims for violation of the California Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR) and California’s unfair competition law (UCL) with leave to amend, holding that she failed to plead sufficient facts to show that a lender violated the laws in relation to a loan modification (Julie Galvez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al., No. 17-cv-06003, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96300).
DETROIT — After finding that a trustee and loan servicer did not fail to give a borrower proper notice in violation of Michigan’s foreclosure by advertisement statue, a Michigan federal judge on June 4 granted dismissal of causes of action related to the foreclosure of the borrower’s property (Maurice McClain v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, et al., No. 18-10452, E.D. Mich., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93729).