CHITESTER v. US BANK
3:23-cv-22554
D.N.J.Jun 23, 2025Background
- U.S. Bank initiated a foreclosure action against Deborah Chitester in New Jersey state court after she defaulted on her mortgage in January 2020.
- Chitester raised over twenty affirmative defenses and two counterclaims in the foreclosure action; the court granted summary judgment to U.S. Bank.
- Chitester then filed a subsequent suit in state court against U.S. Bank, Fay Servicing, and Stern & Eisenberg, challenging loan modification denials and raising several contract and fraud claims; this complaint was dismissed without prejudice.
- Proceeding pro se, Chitester filed this federal suit against U.S. Bank and Fay Servicing, asserting breach of contract, ADA, and RESPA claims, largely based on the prior foreclosure proceedings and alleged mishandling of a trial payment plan.
- Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint despite multiple extensions and filed her claims across numerous fragmented filings rather than a single, coherent complaint.
- Defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim and Plaintiff requested appointment of pro bono counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of Pleading under Rule 8 | Defendants breached obligations and violated federal statutes, with details submitted in multiple pieces | Plaintiff’s complaint is vague, conclusory, and does not meet federal pleading standards | Motion to dismiss granted; one final chance to amend |
| Piecemeal Pleading | Presented claims over several filings and letters as supplementary details | Piecemeal/fragmented pleadings are not permitted under the rules | Ruled impermissible; must file one unified complaint |
| Request for Pro Bono Counsel | Sought appointment of counsel due to inability to afford one | No merit shown in claims; no right to counsel in civil cases | Denied without prejudice |
| Opportunity to Amend | Implicitly requested additional time/extensions | Plaintiff has already had multiple opportunities to amend | One final opportunity to amend granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (standard for pleadings/fair notice requirement under Rule 8)
- Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957) (pleading must give fair notice of claim and grounds)
- Parham v. Johnson, 126 F.3d 454 (3d Cir. 1997) (no constitutional right to counsel in civil cases)
- Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147 (3d Cir. 1993) (court may appoint pro bono counsel if claim has factual and legal merit)
- Garrett v. Wexford Health, 938 F.3d 69 (3d Cir. 2019) (pleading must provide fair notice of claim and grounds)