Advanced Pleadings Search

Federal Court Complaint Concerning Zombie Debt (Richland & Falkowski)

This is a 2021 federal class action complaint in the Eastern District of Virginia concerning the collection of zombie mortgage debt.

Michigan State Court Complaint Concerning Mortgage Loan Servicing After Loan Modification (Owen)

This is a Michigan state court complaint brought in 2013 by Legal Aid of Western Michigan against Ocwen, a mortgage servicer, for failing to properly service the mortgage loan after a loan modification, including improperly computing the loan balance, improper debt collection practices, and failing to reply timely to a qualified written request.  This complaint was filed by John Smith of Legal Aid of Western Michigan.

This is a 2021 Wisconsin state court complaint against TAB bank for various terms violating Wisconsin law found in the installment sales agreement.  Prohibited terms included waiver of rights to a class action and injunctive remedies, a requirement that Utah law applied, an attorney fee shifting provision, an excessive bad check charge, shortening of the default provisions, and failing to timely provide the consumer with a contract. This complaint was filed by Eric Crandall of the Crandall Law Firm.

Federal Court Complaint Regarding Servicer’s Refusal to Communicate with Widow (J.P. Morgan Chase)

This is a 2013 Massachusetts state court complaint against a mortgage servicer for advising a homeowner in financial difficulty to fall behind on mortgage payments to obtain a loan modification. After obtaining the modification and making payments, the servicer refused to accept the modification and requested that they apply for a new modification.  When the homeowner reapplied, the servicer lost documents, required repeated submission of the same documents, misrepresented the modification status, and then initiated foreclosure.  The complaint was filed by Kulik Law.

West Virginia State Court Complaint for a Predatory Loan and Servicer Refusal to Process Loan Modification (Wells Fargo)

Georgia Federal Court Complaint Concerning Zombie Debt (United Asset Management)

This is a 2017 federal court complaint in the Maine district court concerning a homeowner who was given an unaffordable loan modification and the servicer subsequently misrepresented the homeowner’s eligibility for a further modification that would have been affordable under HAMP.  The claim is that this conduct by the servicer is fraudulent, and violates RESPA and the state UDAP and state credit statutes, and the conduct is.

Massachusetts Federal Court Complaint for Failure to Offer Permanent Loan Modification (Bank of America)

This is a 2014 federal court complaint against a mortgage servicer for failure to provide a permanent HAMP loan modification even though the homeowner successfully completed the HAMP trial loan modification and where the servicer instead initiated a foreclosure.  The case was brought by Culik Law.

This is a 2020 order by a bankruptcy court in the Eastern District of North Carolina rejecting bank interest rate preemption because the related non-bank lender was the true lender.  The bankruptcy court denied the creditor’s proof of claim because the loan was usurious under North Carolina law and could not be saved because the loan was allegedly initiated by a bank. 

Alabama Federal Court Complaint for Servicer’s Failure to Investigate Servicer Errors (Nationstar)

This is a 2014 federal court complaint in the Southern District of Alabama against a mortgage servicer for failing to properly credit mortgage payments and then failing to investigate such errors or provide requested information. The case was brought by Underwood and Riemer.

Federal Court Complaint Where Assignee of Second Mortgagee Improperly Charged Interest (Interstate TD Investments)

A homeowner, having filed a chapter 13 bankruptcy in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts, in 2021 objects to the mortgagee’s proof of claim based on the predatory nature of the loan and that the loan terms were knowingly unaffordable.  The homeowner also uses this proceeding to file various counterclaims for the same mortgagee conduct. The filing was submitted by Roger Bertling of the Legal Services Center.

Connecticut Federal Court Complaint for Servicer’s Inadequate Response to Requests for Information and for Mortgage Modifications (CitiMortgage)

Federal Court Complaint Concerning VA Foreclosure Prior to Modification Decision (Wells Fargo)

This is a 2017 second amended complaint filed in the Eastern District of Virginia seeking to unwind the foreclosure of a home that had a VA mortgage loan and where the loan holders and servicers did not follow VA regulations in foreclosing on the home.  The foreclosure occurred while a mortgage modification application was pending. The pleadings were drafted by the Law Office of Henry McLaughlin.

Federal Court Complaint Concerning Servicer Reneging on Mortgage Loan Modification (Bank of America)

Brief supporting an EFTA claim for an unauthorized transfer between two of the consumer's accounts followed by a wire transfer. The brief rebuts the argument that the internal transfer was not unauthorized under the definition of 15 U.S.C. § 1693b(12) and Reg. E, 12 C.F.R. § 1005.2(m) because the consumer received a benefit and because the wire transfer was a separate transaction that had to be analyzed independently.

This is a declaration by Florida attorney Robert Murphy filed in the federal district court for the Eastern District of Virginia concerning various grounds he has witnessed the American Arbitration Association use to refuse to arbitrate a case based on a business's conduct: failing to pay filing fees, failing to register the arbitration agreement, using an arbitration agreement that does not meet the AAA's due process protocols, and the business's conduct in past AAA arbitrations.

This proposed order by Florida attorney Robert Murphy filed in 2023 in the federal district court for the Eastern District of Virginia requests that the case be stayed pending arbitration by the American Arbitration Association, that the court retain jurisdiction in the case, and that the parties be required to participate in the arbitration. The attorney was concerned that the defendant would not participate in the arbitration or that for other reasons the AAA would dismiss the case based on the defendant's conduct.

This memorandum by Florida attorney Robert Murphy filed in the federal district court for the Eastern District of Virginia requests that the case not be dismissed because of an arbitration requirement, but rather that the case be stayed pending arbitration by the American Arbitration Association, and that the court retain jurisdiction. The attorney was concerned that the defendant would not participate in the arbitration or that for other reasons the AAA would dismiss the case based on the defendant's conduct. In that case, the consumer seeks to be able to return to court to

Motion to compel Rule 30(b)(6) deposition (over loan modification review procedures) Wigod v. Wells Fargo Bank N.D. Ill. June 13, 2012 WIGOD, Finlinson and Finlinson, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

Motion to compel answers to request for production of documents, including loan modification data and servicer’s training material, Wigod v. Wells Fargo Bank (N.D. Ill) Aug. 24, 2012) and Reply to Defendant’s Opposition to Motion to Compel Production of Documents,  Oct. 2012 WIGOD, Finlinson and Finlinson, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

Opposition to motion to dismiss Complaint alleging failure to implement loan modification, raising breach of contract, negligence, promissory estoppel, and UDAP against servicer and loan owner. D. Mass. Jan. 2014. Hannigan v Bank of America Feb. 2014 HANNIGAN and Hannigan, Plaintiffs, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for the Certificate holders of Banc of America Mortgage Securities, Inc., Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-7, Defendant., 2014 WL 8388851 (D.Mass.) detailed facts, perm mod, 93A and negligence, contract.

Appellate briefs addressing HAMP TPP class action claims under state UDAP and FDCPA statutes, breach of contract, good faith and fair dealing, and promissory estoppel. Corvello and Lucia v. Wells Fargo
Appellant’s Main Brief  9th Cir. Mar. 22, 2012 and Appellant’s Reply Brief May 23, 2012.  LUCIA and Lucia, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. d/b/a Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and Does 1 through 10, Defendants., 2010 WL 4271748 (N.D.Cal.) 9th Cir various HAMP claims, class action
 

Appellate briefs addressing HAMP TPP class action claims under state UDAP and FDCPA statutes, breach of contract, good faith and fair dealing, and promissory estoppel. Corvello and Lucia v. Wells Fargo
Appellant’s Main Brief  9th Cir. Mar. 22, 2012 and Appellant’s Reply Brief May 23, 2012.  Karen LUCIA and Jeffrey Lucia, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. d/b/a Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and Does 1 through 10, Defendants., 2010 WL 4271748 (N.D.Cal.) 9th Cir various HAMP claims, class action
 

Appellate briefs addressing trustee’s duty of good faith in foreclosing, UDAP claims, U.S.  Bank NA v Lyons  Washington Supreme Court, Main Brief Oct. 2013; Amicus Brief of Northwest Consumer Law Center & Northwest Justice Project  filed April 25, 2014.

Second Amended Class Action Complaint to enforce loan modification agreements, raising contract, good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel and UDAP claims. Bosque v Wells Fargo D. Mass.  Aug. 17, 2010  

Similar claims: 
Bosque v Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 762 F Supp 2d 342 [D Mass 2011] breach of contract, good faith and fair dealing, UDAP Class action, extensive Westlaw pleadings and memos.
 

Class action complaint raising HAMP TPP claims under state UDAP and FDCPA laws, contract, good faith and fair dealing, and promissory estoppel. Lucia v. Wells Fargo Oct. 2010  (joined with Corvello in 9th Circuit appeal with favorable decision) LUCIA and Lucia, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. d/b/a Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and Does 1 through 10, Defendants., 2010 WL 4271748 (N.D.Cal.) 9th Cir various HAMP claims, class action.

Class action complaint involving successor in interest issues, claims of promissory estoppel, negligence, UDAP.

McGarvey v JP Morgan  filed Cal. Super. Court April 2013 later removed, complaint as exhibit in removal motion, needs deletion of exhibits or obtain from firm.  MCGARVEY, An individual, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.; and Does 1 through 100 inclusive, Defendants., 2013 WL 2479615 (E.D.Cal.)  complaint not on Westlaw, good negligence and UDAP (Letcher, Mercer).

Complaint alleging failure to implement loan modification, raising breach of contract, negligence, promissory estoppel, and UDAP against both servicer and loan owner. D. Mass. Jan. 2014.  Joseph HANNIGAN and Linda Hannigan, Plaintiffs, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for the Certificate holders of Banc of America Mortgage Securities, Inc., Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-7, Defendant., 2014 WL 8388851 (D.Mass.) detailed facts, perm mod, 93A and negligence, contract.

Class action compliant enforcement of conversions to permanent modifications, breach of contract, good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, and UDAP claims  Cave v. Saxon Mortgage Services  E.D. Pa.  Sept. 2012  CAVE, and Smith, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. SAXON MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC. and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, Defendant., 2012 WL 4718976 (E.D.Pa.) good decision, class action HAMP background breach of contract, UDAP, FDCPA     

Subpoena for records from DocuSign regarding an electronically executed contract for solar panels.

Complaint alleging that an algorithm-based tenant screening system had a disparate impact in violation of the Fair Housing Act, Massachusetts Consumer Protection Law, and Massachusetts General Laws

Statement of Interest of the United States in matter alleging that an algorithm-based tenant screening system had a disparate impact in violation of the Fair Housing Act, Massachusetts Consumer Protection Law, and Massachusetts General Laws.