A recent ruling by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has largely upheld a lower court’s decision in a case involving a homeowner, Donna R. Embry, and Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC, and Wilmington Savings Fund Society FSB. The case centered on a foreclosure dispute, with Embry alleging various violations of federal and state laws.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision in several key areas, including the foreclosure itself. However, the appellate court did find one error in the lower court’s handling of a claim under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA).
Background of the Case
The case originated from a mortgage taken out by Donna Embry in 2007. After facing financial difficulties, Embry filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection in 2010, which was later discharged in 2015. She defaulted on her loan in 2018.
Embry filed another Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition in 2019, but it was dismissed due to a failure to make payments. Carrington Mortgage Services began servicing the loan in November 2019. According to the court documents, no payments were received on the loan since August 2019, and Embry testified that she did not attempt to make payments to Carrington.
In June 2018, the previous loan servicer, Chase, notified Embry of her default and intent to foreclose. Wilmington issued a similar notice in August 2021, scheduling a foreclosure sale. Embry then filed a lawsuit in state court, which was later moved to federal court. Wilmington filed counterclaims for breach of contract and judicial foreclosure.
District Court’s Ruling and the Appeal
The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Carrington and Wilmington. It rejected Embry’s claims of breach of contract, unjust enrichment, defamation, and violations of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The court also granted Wilmington’s counterclaims for declaratory judgment, breach of contract, and judicial foreclosure.
Embry appealed the district court’s decision, arguing that the court improperly shifted the burden of proof to her. The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the case, examining the arguments and evidence presented.
Eleventh Circuit’s Analysis
The Eleventh Circuit provided a detailed explanation of the standards for summary judgment. In essence, the court explained that the moving party (in this case, Carrington and Wilmington) must show there is no genuine dispute of material fact. Then, the burden shifts to the non-moving party (Embry) to present evidence creating a genuine issue for trial.
Specific Claims and the Court’s Findings
* Slander, Libel, and Defamation: The court agreed with the district court that Embry failed to identify any specific defamatory statements made by the defendants, therefore, the lower court did not err in granting summary judgment for the defendants.
* RESPA Violation: The appellate court found that the district court erred in rejecting Embry’s RESPA claim. The lower court stated that Embry had not provided the contents of the Qualified Written Requests (QWRs). The Eleventh Circuit found that Embry had, in fact, attached the purported QWRs to her amended complaint, and thus, the RESPA claim was remanded for the district court to address further.
* FCRA Violation: The Eleventh Circuit agreed with the district court that Embry failed to provide evidence to support her FCRA claim. She did not produce any evidence to show that Carrington reported any inaccurate or incomplete information.
* FDCPA Violation: The court agreed with the district court, finding that Embry did not provide evidence to counter the evidence presented by the defendants.
* Breach of Contract: The Eleventh Circuit agreed with the district court’s finding that Embry had breached the contract by failing to make required payments. The Court also agreed with the lower court’s decision to reject Embry’s claim that the defendants violated paragraph 2 of the contract, as it was consistent with Alabama law.
* Paragraph 22 Violation: The appellate court affirmed the district court’s holding that Embry breached the contract and also affirmed the district court’s grant of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment of foreclosure.
Conclusion
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s judgment in most respects, supporting the foreclosure and rejecting most of Embry’s claims. However, the appellate court did find that the district court erred in its handling of the RESPA claim, remanding that specific issue for further consideration.