Baldwin v. Wells Fargo Financial National Bank
3:16-cv-04841
S.D.W. VaJan 5, 2017Background
- Plaintiffs Jared and Victoria Baldwin fell behind on an alleged debt; Wells Fargo called them repeatedly to collect, often multiple times per day.
- Plaintiffs notified Wells Fargo on a call that they had retained counsel and provided attorney contact information; calls allegedly continued after that notice.
- Plaintiffs sued in state court alleging WVCCPA violations, IIED and/or NIED, and invasion of privacy; defendant removed to federal court and moved to dismiss common-law counts.
- The First Amended Complaint alleges (1) breaches of specific WVCCPA provisions, (2) intentional and/or negligent infliction of emotional distress based on frequent and threatening calls and policies permitting such calls, and (3) invasion of privacy by unreasonable intrusion (harassing calls).
- The court applied Twombly/Iqbal pleading standards and the West Virginia rule from Casillas requiring common-law claims to be pleaded separately but permitting them to be based on similar facts as statutory claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IIED is plausibly pleaded | Baldwin: frequent, threatening calls (including after counsel notice) and unlawful policies amount to outrageous conduct causing severe emotional distress | Wells Fargo: IIED just restates WVCCPA allegations and is not separately pleaded | Court: IIED survives — factual allegations (high-volume, threatening calls after counsel notice) are sufficient at motion-to-dismiss stage |
| Whether NIED is plausibly pleaded | Baldwin: pleads emotional distress alternatively to IIED | Wells Fargo: no viable NIED theory; allegations show intentional not negligent conduct and lack NIED elements | Court: NIED dismissed — complaint lacks applicable NIED theory or necessary factual predicates |
| Whether invasion of privacy (intrusion upon seclusion) is plausibly pleaded | Baldwin: repeated calls after notice of counsel invaded privacy and caused distress | Wells Fargo: invasion claim duplicates WVCCPA and should be dismissed | Court: Invasion of privacy survives — allegations of repeated, harassing calls (after counsel notice) state a plausible intrusion claim |
| Whether common-law claims impermissibly duplicate WVCCPA | Baldwin: common-law claims are separate causes of action though based on same facts | Wells Fargo: common-law claims merely recite WVCCPA violations and must be dismissed under Casillas | Court: Casillas allows separate common-law claims if pleaded directly and separately; here IIED and invasion survive, NIED does not |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (plausibility standard for federal pleadings)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (application of plausibility standard; courts need not accept legal conclusions)
- Casillas v. Tuscarora Land Co., 412 S.E.2d 792 (W. Va. 1991) (WVCCPA does not preclude separate common-law claims if pleaded separately)
- Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont, 289 S.E.2d 692 (W. Va. 1982) (recognizing IIED/outrage tort in West Virginia)
- Heldreth v. Marrs, 425 S.E.2d 157 (W. Va. 1992) (elements and limitations for bystander NIED in West Virginia)
- Travis v. Alcon Laboratories, Inc., 504 S.E.2d 419 (W. Va. 1998) (elements of IIED; severe distress standard)
- Tanner v. Rite Aid of West Virginia, Inc., 461 S.E.2d 149 (W. Va. 1995) (outrageousness standard for IIED)
- Brown v. City of Fairmont, 655 S.E.2d 563 (W. Va. 2007) (NIED confined to conduct endangering physical safety or causing fear for physical safety)