In Re: Residential Capital, LLC, 1:15-cv-06738

Todd Silber, pro se, appealed the bankruptcy court’s August 4, 2015 order disallowing his claims against GMAC Mortgage, LLC (GMACM) for allegedly mishandling multiple loan-modification (workout) applications for his FHA-insured mortgage.
Silber submitted repeated workout packages (2009–2012), including documentation of unemployment and rental income; GMACM at times misapplied guidelines (used non-FHA standards, considered only 75% of rental income, misstated unemployment documentation requirements) and misstated to a Connecticut AAG that unemployment income could not be used.
GMACM denied several HAMP/FHA modification requests based on DTI calculations and other deficiencies; it offered a 6-month forbearance in 2010 and provided a $43,736.80 reinstatement quote to CHFA for Silber’s EHLP application.
Silber sued asserting breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligent misrepresentation, and CUTPA violations; Bankruptcy Court held GMACM erred in some procedures but Silber failed to prove he would have qualified for a FHA HAMP modification or that he reasonably relied on the alleged misrepresentations.
District Court affirmed: it found no clear error in the bankruptcy court’s factual findings and agreed Silber failed to prove damages or reliance required for his claims, so all claims were dismissed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Due process — denial of closing argument	Silber: court violated due process by denying his closing argument	GMACM: denial was within the court’s discretion; Silber had ample opportunity to present his case	Denial was not an abuse of discretion; no due process violation
Credibility of Trust witness (Cunningham)	Silber: Cunningham’s testimony was inconsistent and not credible	GMACM: Bankruptcy Court is entitled to assess credibility; Cunningham’s testimony was probative	Credibility findings upheld; no reversible error
Damages for breach of contract / implied covenant	Silber: GMACM’s procedural errors caused loss; he sought to be made whole	GMACM: Silber did not prove he would have qualified for modification or show ascertainable monetary loss	Silber failed to prove damages causally tied to breaches; claim dismissed
Negligent misrepresentation & CUTPA	Silber: misstatements (AAG email and reinstatement quote) were false and harmed him; CUTPA violation	GMACM: misstatements were not relied upon by Silber and reinstatement quote was accurate; CUTPA requires ascertainable loss	Claims dismissed: Silber did not reasonably rely on misstatements nor show ascertainable loss under CUTPA

Slainte Investments Ltd. P’ship v. Jeffrey, 142 F. Supp. 3d 239 (D. Conn. 2015) (elements of breach of contract under Connecticut law)
Fracasse v. People’s United Bank, 747 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 2014) (elements of implied covenant claim; bad faith standard)
Richards v. Direct Energy Servs., LLC, 120 F. Supp. 3d 148 (D. Conn. 2015) (bad-faith definition for implied covenant claims)
Stuart v. Freiberg, 316 Conn. 809 (Conn. 2015) (elements of negligent misrepresentation under Connecticut law)
In re Manville Forest Prods. Corp., 896 F.2d 1384 (2d Cir. 1990) (standard of review for bankruptcy findings of fact and law)
Anderson v. City of Bessemer, 470 U.S. 564 (U.S. 1985) (clear-error standard explanation)
Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100 (U.S. 1969) (deference to trial court credibility assessments)
McCann Real Equities Series XXII, LLC v. David McDermott Chevrolet, Inc., 93 Conn. App. 486 (Conn. App. 2006) (damages are essential element of breach of contract)
Gaudio v. Griffin Health Servs. Corp., 249 Conn. 523 (Conn. 1999) (proof of damages with reasonable certainty required)