|
Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, Writ Quashed, Alabama Supreme Court. Our client purchased a 40-acre tract of land and subsequently built a multi-million dollar development with over 100 commercial tenants. The plaintiffs alleged that they owned an easement through a large portion of the commercial development and sought demolition of the development plus compensatory damages from the alleged diminution in value of their adjacent commercial development. After extensive discovery and expert witness testimony, the trial court granted summary judgment which involved an analysis of recorded instruments and whether they were easements or licenses and the ability to convey same.
|
|
Matter dismissed with prejudice after borrower made multi-million dollar claims against servicer and individual employees of the servicer for fraud and violations of RICO.
|
|
Obtained a dismissal of plaintiff’s breach of contract claim in a nationwide class action. The claims of the putative class were also dismissed with prejudice.
|
|
Borrowers alleged numerous causes of action against mortgage servicer, including violations of Florida statutes, willful conduct, and damages claims of pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, loss of earnings, loss of ability to earn money, and/or aggravation of a previously existing condition. The matter was removed to the Southern District of Florida and, after extensive discovery including expert discovery, the plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed on summary judgment. The matter was appealed to the Eleventh Circuit and upheld.
|
|
Managed and conducted approximately 200 third party vendor management legal compliance interviews, including default firms, bankruptcy firms, and collection firms. Assisted in drafting a summary of findings, recommended remediation when necessary, and an audit of certain files for each third party vendor.
|
|
Developed a standardized, single affidavit of indebtedness for all judicial foreclosure states, taking into account all recently passed laws and judicial administrative orders.
|
|
Obtained dismissal of claims brought against individual corporate officers of a bank and mortgage servicing company based upon lack of personal jurisdiction in a lawsuit filed in the Middle District of Pennsylvania wherein the borrower alleged common law fraud and violation of RICO.
|
|
Successfully represented mortgage servicing company in seven copycat cases filed in federal and state courts in Southern Florida and obtained dismissal with prejudice of claims alleging violations of RESPA, TILA, and the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, in addition to claims for fraud and rescission of mortgage loan.
|
|
We aggressively represented GMAC Mortgage in a commercial dispute against Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp. related to a series of Purchase & Sale Agreements governing thousands of residential mortgages loans. In that litigation, Taylor Bean asserted claims for breach of contract against GMACM and GMACM asserted claims against Taylor Bean for breach of contract, offset/recoupment, declaratory judgment, indemnification, fraudulent inducement, and for attorneys’ fees. After three years of litigation and shortly before trial, the case ended in a mutually agreeable settlement. Following the settlement, we subsequently represented GMAC in further repurchase demands with Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp., which were resolved without further litigation.
|
|
The firm represented Ally Financial, Inc, Residential Capital, LLC and GMAC Mortgage in the largest national joint state/federal government settlement in history. The case began with “robo-signing” investigation and then broadened into examination of the mortgage industry. The case involved 49 state attorney generals, 48 state banking departments, the Department of Justice, the Department of Treasury, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Consumer Financial Protect Bureau, and the Federal Trade Commission. The closely-watched and widely publicized case is precedent-setting in that it established national mortgage loan servicing standards. We represented our clients in successfully negotiating and advocating that, based on the clients’ past leadership in the loan modification/loss mitigation area, even during the worst economic conditions in decades, they should receive a reduced settlement amount. In addition, we negotiated a different consumer relief structure as part of the settlement that recognized the clients’ past accomplishments in loan modification/loss mitigation. Court entered the Consent Order on April 5, 2012 in the District Court for the District of Columbia. The total settlement amount was $25 Billion. Our client paid $309 Million.
|