Collins v. Residential Acceptance Corporation
3:24-cv-00134
M.D. La.Jul 17, 2024Background
- Donna Collins filed suit pro se against Residential Acceptance Corporation (RAC) and Village Capital Investment LLC, asserting a variety of claims stemming from her home purchase and mortgage contract on December 7, 2022.
- Collins alleged breach of contract, anti-predatory lending violations, good faith guideline violations, and a range of statutory and state law tort claims relating to the mortgage origination and servicing.
- Defendants moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim and, in RAC’s case, also challenged subject matter jurisdiction.
- Collins failed to timely oppose the motions; her complaint was scrutinized under the more lenient standards applicable to pro se litigants, but she was still held to pleading requirements.
- The Court reviewed the sufficiency of each claim, the applicability of statutes of limitations, and whether Collins had a private right of action under the statutes invoked.
- The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissing most claims with prejudice, but allowed Collins one opportunity to amend the complaint with respect to breach of contract, anti-predatory lending, and good faith guideline violations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of Contract | Defendants breached mortgage/note terms | No specific breaches alleged | Dismissed without prejudice; opportunity to amend |
| Anti-Predatory Lending | Violations under Dodd-Frank Act | No private right of action, no specific facts alleged | Dismissed without prejudice; opportunity to amend |
| Good Faith Guideline Violations | General claim of violation | Claim is vague, not tied to law or facts | Dismissed without prejudice; opportunity to amend |
| Unjust Enrichment | No proper mortgage/note recording, defendants enriched | Contract governs parties, claim is barred | Dismissed with prejudice |
| UCC Violations | Defects in property interest filings | Loan not a sale of goods; filings proper | Dismissed with prejudice |
| FTC Act & Holder Rule | Unfair/deceptive practices, holder in due course rule | No private right of action under these laws | Dismissed with prejudice |
| FCRA & Defamation | Improper reporting hurt credit/defamed | Remedies lie with government, no private action | Dismissed with prejudice |
| TILA, FDCPA, LUTPA, Fraud/Negligence/Conversion | Various statutory and tort violations | All time-barred; beyond 1-year limitations | Dismissed with prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (articulates plausibility pleading standard under Rule 12(b)(6))
- Funk v. Stryker Corp., 631 F.3d 777 (5th Cir. 2011) (matters subject to judicial notice on 12(b)(6) motions)
- Lormand v. U.S. Unwired, Inc., 565 F.3d 228 (5th Cir. 2009) (all reasonable inferences to be drawn in favor of plaintiff)
- Edwards v. Conforto, 636 So. 2d 901 (La. 1993) (unjust enrichment claim unavailable when contract governs)
- Barbe v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 383 F. Supp. 3d 634 (E.D. La. 2019) (pleading breach of specific contract term is required under Louisiana law)