Witengier v. U.S. Bank National Association, 4:16-cv-01855

In 2010 plaintiffs Julian and Marceline Witengier took a mortgage from U.S. Bank secured by a deed of trust recorded in St. Louis County; a purported loan modification was dated 2014.
Plaintiffs defaulted; U.S. Bank appointed SouthLaw, P.C. as successor trustee in September 2016 and SouthLaw scheduled a trustee’s sale for October 2016; foreclosure was stopped when plaintiffs filed bankruptcy.
Plaintiffs (pro se) sued in state court alleging breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and quiet title; U.S. Bank removed the case to federal court on diversity grounds.
Plaintiffs challenge the loan modification, the designation of SouthLaw as successor trustee, adequacy/timeliness of sale notice under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 443.325, lack of a single point of contact/reinstatement information, and assert broad fraud allegations against defendants.
SouthLaw moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), arguing plaintiffs fail to allege breach of trustee duties, that claims are essentially wrongful-foreclosure claims (moot because no sale occurred), and that SouthLaw has no property interest and so is not a proper quiet-title defendant.
The Court assumed plaintiff’s factual allegations true for purposes of the motion but found the notice/foreclosure challenges moot (no sale occurred) and that plaintiffs failed to plead facts showing SouthLaw claims any title or interest; claims against SouthLaw were dismissed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Breach of contract / breach of implied covenant	Plaintiffs say SouthLaw failed to comply with deed-of-trust duties (notice, sale procedure) and violated the modification terms	SouthLaw says plaintiffs do not plead facts showing SouthLaw breached duties and foreclosure did not occur	Dismissed — claims moot or insufficiently pleaded; no viable breach shown against SouthLaw
Sufficiency/timeliness of trustee’s-sale notice	Notice mailed fewer than 20 days before sale, addressed to a “doe tenant,” not recorded in official records	SouthLaw contends any alleged notice defects are moot because no sale occurred and trustee complied with deed terms	Dismissed as moot because planned sale never took place
Quiet title	Plaintiffs seek to quiet title, alleging defendants claim interest adverse to them	SouthLaw argues it has no ownership or lien interest; only acts as trustee under deed of trust	Dismissed — plaintiffs failed to allege SouthLaw claims any title, estate, or interest adverse to them
Standing / party propriety	Plaintiffs name SouthLaw as defendant for actions in foreclosure process	SouthLaw argues no privity/interest in property and thus is not a proper quiet-title defendant	Court agrees SouthLaw has no proprietary stake beyond trustee duties; not a proper quiet-title defendant

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleading)
Mildfelt v. Circuit Court of Jackson Cty., Mo., 827 F.2d 343 (8th Cir. 1987) (extrajudicial foreclosure is a contractual right under power-of-sale)
Jenkins v. Thayer, 760 S.W.2d 932 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988) (no prejudice from inadequate notice when no sale occurs)
Sparks v. PNC Bank, 400 S.W.3d 454 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013) (trustee duties include fairness and impartiality; trustee may rely on mortgagee absent actual knowledge of a legal bar)
Williams v. Kimes, 25 S.W.3d 150 (Mo. 2000) (trustee is a proper party in deed-of-trust matters)
Robson v. Diem, 317 S.W.3d 706 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010) (purpose and scope of quiet title actions)
Lester v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, 505 S.W.3d 843 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016) (quiet title does not adjudicate title against the whole world, only parties)
Reliance Bank v. Paramount Prop., LLC, 425 S.W.3d 202 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014) (scope of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing)