SAN FRANCISCO — A California appeals panel on Dec. 16 affirmed a lower court’s judgment of dismissal of a lawsuit alleging wrongful disclosure and claims under California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR), finding that the plaintiff failed to assert the property ownership required under the HBOR (Anthony A. Malfatti v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, et al., No. A153821, Calif. App., 1st Dist., Div. 3, 2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8429).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California appeals panel on Dec. 27 affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a lawsuit alleging that a loan servicer violated California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and Homeowners Bill of Rights (HBOR), finding that the plaintiffs cannot establish a UCL claim by borrowing statutory violations from both HBOR and the federal Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) (Jeffrey E. Finsand, et al. v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, et al., No. H045052, Calif. App., 6th Dist., 2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8628).
NEW ORLEANS — A Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Jan. 7 upheld a ruling dismissing a couple’s quiet title lawsuit, finding that a federal judge in Texas did not err because the couple did not sufficiently allege in a second amended complaint that an appraisal of their home was invalid under the Texas Constitution because it was for more than 80 percent of their home (Femi Onabajo, et al. v. Household Finance Corporation III, et al., No. 19-50365, 5th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 460).
RICHMOND, Va. — A Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Jan. 7 denied a couple’s request for a rehearing on their arguments that a federal judge in Virginia erred when dismissing as untimely their claims for declaratory judgment and breach of contract against their mortgage lender and loan servicer and noted that no judge requested a poll for an en banc rehearing (Carlos Manotas, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, et al., No. 18-2026, 4th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 401).
DALLAS — A federal judge in Texas on Jan. 6 adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny a man’s motion for a temporary restraining order that would enjoin a foreclosure sale scheduled for Jan. 7, finding that the man’s request was untimely and that he was unable to show a likelihood of success on his claims (Brett Stacy v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A., No. 19-cv-446, N.D. Texas).
PASADENA, Calif. — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Dec. 27 affirmed the dismissal of man’s Truth in Lending Act (TILA) lawsuit seeking rescission of a loan, holding that his failure to attempt to resolve his claim with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. excluded the court from having jurisdiction under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) (Norman Shaw v. Bank of America Corp., et al., No. 17-56706, 9th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 38549).
BUFFALO, N.Y.— A federal judge in New York on Dec. 30 denied a couple’s motion to certify a nationwide class for borrowers who claim that Bank of America N.A. violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) by failing to use reasonable diligence when reviewing loan modification applications, holding that their expert’s report showed that the proposed class lacked commonality and that individual issues predominated over classwide questions (Bobbi Jackson, et al. v. Bank of America N.A., No. 16-CV-757, W.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222511).
FORT WORTH, Texas — A federal judge in Texas on Dec. 13 awarded summary judgment to Wells Fargo Bank N.A. on a woman’s claim that the lender violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), ruling that while it is unclear if the bank properly responded to her loan modification application, her failure to allege damages was fatal to her cause of action (Jerri Gooden v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A., No. 19-cv-00244-P, N.D. Texas, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214821).
LOS ANGELES — A proposed class of borrowers sufficiently stated a claim that JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. (Chase) violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) when failing to timely respond to requests for recordings of calls regarding their loans, a federal judge in California ruled Dec. 23, holding that the requests were not overbroad (Anthony Barbano, et al. v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A., No. 19-1218, C.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220251).
PROVIDENCE, R.I. — A federal judge in Rhode Island on Dec. 18 granted a mortgage lender’s motion for summary judgment in a suit it brought seeking judicial foreclosure on a woman’s home, holding that its notice of default complied with the terms of the mortgage and that it had standing to bring the lawsuit (Citibank N.A. v. Katherine L. Caito, No. 18-427-JJM-LDA, D. R.I., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219473).
ATLANTA — An 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Dec. 19 affirmed the dismissal of a couple’s lawsuit challenging the foreclosure on their home, holding that there is no actual controversy over the assignment of interest in the loan among lenders because it is allowed in the security deed (Allan Lavut, et al. v. Bank of America N.A., et al., No. 19-11123, 11th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 37774).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — HSBC Bank USA, National Association and PHH Mortgage Corp. will pay $2.4 million to end a class suit accusing the two companies of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by placing automatic debt collection calls to cell phones without prior consent, according to a class settlement granted final approval by a federal judge in California on Dec. 30 (Saber Ahmed, et al. v. HSBC Bank USA, et al., No. 15-2057, C.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222750).
SEATTLE — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Dec. 13 affirmed a ruling dismissing a man’s lawsuit alleging that his mortgage lender and loan servicer’s attempt to foreclose on his loan was barred by the six-year statute of limitations, finding that the man restarted the limitations period when he requested a loan modification (David Barton Thacker v. Bank of New York Mellon, et al., No. 19-35215, 9th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36894).
BOSTON — A federal judge in Massachusetts on Dec. 20 remanded a class action lawsuit brought by a woman who claims that a loan servicer’s repeated phone calls to her about her defaulted mortgage loan violated state law, finding that the loan servicer failed to show that the damages the woman is seeking are in excess of $75,000 (Cheryl Pantano v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, No 19-cv-11178, D. Mass., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219033).
NEW ORLEANS — A Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Dec. 19 upheld the dismissal of a class action suit brought by active members of the military who claim that their mortgages were unlawfully foreclosed upon in violation of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), finding that orders for the seizure of the borrowers’ property that were obtained through executory proceedings in Louisiana state court were not default judgments (Steven Fodge, et al. v. Trustmark National Bank, et al., No. 19-30279, 5th Cir.).
PHILADELPHIA — The city of Philadelphia and Wells Fargo & Co. on Dec. 16 filed a joint stipulation to dismiss with prejudice a lawsuit the city filed in Pennsylvania federal court against the bank, after the lender agreed to pay $10 million to resolve allegations that it violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) by steering African American and Latino borrowers into loans that had less favorable terms than those offered to Caucasian borrowers (Philadelphia v. Wells Fargo & Co., No. 17-cv-2203, E.D. Pa.).
NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Texas did not err when dismissing with prejudice a couple’s lawsuit against their mortgage lender and loan servicer, a Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Dec. 13, holding that the couple’s failure to sufficiently state a claim under the Texas Debt Collection Act (TDCA) was also fatal to their cause of action under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (TDCPA) (Kenneth Lawry v. Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co., N.A., No. 19-10671, 5th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36963).
NEW ORLEANS — A Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Dec. 10 affirmed a summary judgment ruling in favor of a lender and loan servicer, holding that a woman’s multiple filings for bankruptcy tolled the four-year statute of limitations for the lender’s counterclaim for judicial foreclosure (Sharon D. Rose v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc., et al., No. 19-50598, 5th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36574).
OAKLAND, Calif. — A federal magistrate judge in California on Dec. 10 refused to dismiss claims for violation of California unfair competition law (UCL) and other claims in a foreclosure dispute but noted that the UCL claim may proceed only under the unfair and unlawful prongs (Frederick James Beatty v. PHH Mortgage Corporation, et al., No. 19-05145, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213794).
RICHMOND, Va. — A Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Dec. 9 upheld a ruling dismissing as untimely a couple’s lawsuit against their mortgage lender and loan servicer, finding that the plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment and breach of contract claims are both subject to the state’s five-year statute of limitations (Carlos Manotas, et al. v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, et al., No. 18-2026, 4th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 36394).